Socialization and Education

(1)

Katalin N. Kollár Éva Jármi

(2)

Magdolna Kalmár Laura Szabó János Gy ri Gabriella Pajor

SOCIALIZATION AND EDUCATION

The module socialization and education of the psychology doctoral school of Eötvös University consists of three compulsory and three optional courses. The compulsory course titles are the following: "Social relationships and social psychology at school", "Theoretical and methodological approaches to socialization", and "Teaching psychology in higher education". The optional course can be one of the following three: "Research in childhood development", "Psychological aspects of school learning (motivation and learning disabilities)", "Cultural aspects of family and school socialization and education processes".

Our curriculum contains tree chapters. In the first material we present these courses. In these courses firstly, we offer up to date psychological knowledge in the fields that are important in educational studies, such as developmental psychology and socialization, social psychology at school and we discuss other important topics, such as learning difficulties and inter- and multicultural questions. Secondly, we discuss dilemmas of research methodology related to educational studies.

The third aspect of our module is methodology of teaching. We offer training on the field of higher education.

Our second chapter contains materials for one of the compulsory courses and the third is an optional course.

The second chapter deals with the seminar "Teaching psychology in higher education". The aim of the course is to prepare students for teaching psychology in the training of teachers, psychologists and other professions. The course focuses on two main topics: development of a curriculum and teaching practice. The course provides knowledge of methodology, case studies of real life teaching situations, and reflections on these experiences. To make these reflections systematic, we developed a set of checklists and registration sheets for curriculum development, and for use during seminars and lectures.

The third chapter is "Psychological Issues of school learning".

This course deals with cognitive and motivational issues of learning. The latest scientific findings of developmental cognitive neuroscience on the relationship between brain and behavior contribute to the understanding of typical and atypical cognitive processes. To this course we developed learning materials for these doctoral lessons.

TÁMOP 4.1.2.A/1-11/1-2011-0018

(3)

1. Introduction of the module

Introduction video [ ]

(5)

2. Teaching psychology in higher education (issues of methodology)

The main aim of the course is to prepare students for teaching psychology courses in the training of teachers, psychologists and other professions where psychology is part of the curriculum (social workers, educational studies, mental health studies etc.) at university level.

The course focuses on two main topics:

• compilation and development of a curriculum

• teaching practice

The course offers knowledge of methodology, simulations of and/or real life teaching situations, and analyses of these experiences. For these analyses we developed checklists and registration shits for systematic observations for two main types of courses, for seminars and for lectures.

Curriculum development: checklist for course planning

• Aspects of curriculum development - checklist

(PDF [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/soced/II_curriculum_development.pdf]) Analysis of seminars

• Aspects for self-evaluation and observer's estimations

(PDF [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/soced/II_selfevaluation_obesrversestimations.pdf])

• Registrations sheet for seminars

(DOCX [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/soced/II_registration_sheet_seminar.docx], PDF [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/soced/II_registration_sheet_seminar.pdf])

Analyse of lectures

• Registration sheet for lecture

(DOCX [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/soced/II_registration_sheet_lecture.docx], PDF [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/soced/II_registration_sheet_lecture.pdf])

(6)

3. Psychological Issues of school learning: learning disabilities

Identification, researches and intervention

3.1. Definition of LD

Problem of definition

• Proportion of children identified with LDs in the United States¹: 42% of all children receiving special education services in 2014.

1"Look for statistics from other countries!" [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/soced/III_LD_1.pdf]

(7)

• Consequences of lack of definitional clarity:

Accurate identification of children (and adults) in need of services in special education ???

Provision of accommodations for high-stakes accountability and college aptitude tests ???

Individual eligibility for insurance and other entitlements ???

Development of specialized interventions ???

Selection of people with LDs for research studies ???

Why are LDs difficult to define?

1. LD is an unobservable latent construct: unexpected underachievement = individuals unable to master academic skills despite the absence of known causes of poor achievement.

Expected underachievement:

- Sensory disorder - Mental retardation - Emotional disturbances - Economic disadvantage - Linguistic diversity - Inadequate instruction

(8)

"Unexpectedness" of LD: the score on an achievement test is significantly lower than the score obtained on an IQ measure (= measure of learning potential) and exclusions have been eliminated.

No single observable measure (reading, math, cognitive processes) captures all the components of the construct and each measurement contains a certain amount of error -> reliability and validity of the classification that is the basis for identifying LD.

2. LDs are dimensional: LDs occur along a continuum of severity <-> explicit dichotomous category

• Achievement test scores are normally distributed (vs. have a natural cut-point) - Arbitrary cut-points²: e.g. 20th percentile, -2SD

- Effect of the error of measurement magnified if the attribute is measured only once.

• No qualitatively different genetic constellations associated with the heritability of reading and math disorders ("generalist genes")

Exclusionary vs. inclusionary approaches of definition

• Exclusionary: indicate what LDs are not (e.g. dyslexia³)

• Inclusionary: focus on a key set of marker variables that lead directly to identification (e.g. dyslexia⁴)

• Definitions⁵

Split or lump LDs in the DSM-V. ?

• Proposed criteria for LD in the DSM-V.

• Expand the definition to include additional subtypes of LD [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/

soced/III_LD_DSM_1.pdf]: word reading, reading fluency, reading comprehension, written expression, mathematics calculations, and mathematics problem solving.

• Two categories [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/soced/III_LD_DSM_2.pdf]: Dyslexia/

specific reading disorder, other LDs

• DSM-V [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/soced/III_LD_DSM_3.pdf]: single, overall diagnosis of "Specific Learning Disorder". + descriptive feature specifiers to detail current manifestation

• Family aggregation: common genetic etiology

• Environmental risk factors: Prematurity/very low birth weight and prenatal exposure to nicotine increase the risk for LD across all academic domains in childhood

• Prior psychiatric history: a developmental history of Communication Disorders (Speech Sound Disorder and/or SLI) in preschool years is a common precursor of all three LD categories listed in DSM-IV

• Comorbidity: High rates of comorbidity amongst the various categories of LD across the lifespan and across divergent cultural/linguistic groups challenge their discreteness

2"Look for examples from different domains, from practice vs. research"

3"A disorder manifested by difficulties in learning to read despite conventional instruction, adequate intelligence, and socio-economic opportunity. It is dependent upon fundamental cognitive disabilities, which are frequently of constitutional origin" (1968)

4"Dyslexia is a specific LD that is neurobiological in origin. It is characterized by difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding abilities. These difficulties typically result from a deficit in the phonological component of language that is often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of effective classroom instruction. Secondary consequences may include problems in reading comprehension and reduced reading experience that can impede growth of vocabulary and background knowledge." (1994)

5"Look for exclusionary vs. inclusionary definitions of other LDs!"

(9)

• Cognitive processes: cognitive profiles of these disorders differ only in subtle ways, comorbidity may be due to slow processing speed

• Diagnostic stability: developmental accumulation of learning difficulties with increasing cognitive demands of the curriculum

• BUT: isolated, domain-specific deficits

• BUT: Different manifestations of LD require and respond to different interventions; little evidence of generalizability to other domains

3.2. Models of classification for LDs

1. Aptitude-achievement discrepancy 2. Low achievement

3. Intraindividual differences 4. Response to intervention (RTI) 1. Aptitude-Achievement Discrepancy

• Aptitude: composite measure of IQ (or verbal IQ, nonverbal IQ, non-IQ⁶)

• Weak external validity: IQ-achievement discrepancy will not produce differences among subgroups that represent different forms of underachievement.

Cognitive, behavioral and achievement correlates of IQ-discrepancy -> NO significant difference in pattern between low achievement group and IQ-achievement discrepant children

Development (rate of growth over time, level of ability at different age), prognosis, precursors -> NO difference

Intervention outcomes -> NO strong relation, especially NO interaction between effect of intervention and levels of IQ

Neurobiological factors -> NO evidence for differential genetic etiology, or different neuroimaging profiles

• Psychometric factors in discrepancy models:

Regression to the mean

Lower reliability of discrepancy scores

Individuals around the cut-points are too similar 2. Low achievement

• LD identification based on absolute low achievement BUT it means LD = low achievement

• Identification of unexpected underachievement needs additional criteria, which rule out other causes of low achievement (e.g. mental retardation)

• Common practice⁷: IQ in normal range AND achievement score below the cut-point.

• Unique group of underachievers whose low performance is attributed to emotional disturbance, economic disadvantage etc. (e.g. DL)

3. Intraindividual Differences Model

• The person with LDs is one with strengths in many areas but weaknesses in some core cognitive processes that lead to underachievement -> pattern of strengths and weaknesses is used as a marker to identify unexpected underachievement

6"Look for examples of aptitude measures from different domains!"

7"Collect data about local practices"

(10)

• Unevenness in development indicated by performance across a battery of cognitive or neuropsychological tests: cognitive assessments can separate underachievement that is due to intrinsic, constitutional factors from underachievement due to social and economic factors.

• Core cognitive processes⁸ in reading, writing, spelling and math (…)

• Screening batteries⁹ to assess core cognitive processes in reading, writing, spelling and math (…) – in kindergarten, and in first and second Grades.

• Using multiple tests at the same time point, looking for recurrent discrepancies in similar tests within a profile -> reliability, BUT measures of processing skills have reliabilities that are lower than norm-referenced IQ and achievement tests

• BUT little evidence: e.g. word recognition problems – phonological awareness and rapid naming of letters also in children who are economically disadvantaged, second language learners or emotionally disturbed

• BUT training cognitive processes (e.g. phonological awareness) in the absence of an emphasis on content (e.g. letter component) doesn’t usually translate into the related academic area (e.g. reading).

• Individuals with increasingly severe academic problems will show increasingly flat profiles on cognitive tasks – most severely impaired are excluded ???

4. RTI Models¹⁰

• Unexpected underachievement = inadequate response to increasingly intense instruction/high-quality intervention that is effective with most individuals.

8"Collect those processes that recent research has shown are relevant to learning academic skills"

9http://www.sedl.org/reading/rad/database.html

10http://www.ritap.org/rti/about/overview.php

(11)

• Assessments of learning and progress over time – multiple assessments over time ( <-> status models).

Estimates of growth parameters AND estimate of status: the intercept term in the individual growth model.

• "RTI is the practice of (1) providing high-quality instruction/intervention matched to student needs and (2) using learning rate over time and level of performance to (3) make important educational decisions to guide instruction."

• Requires closer integration of general education and special education: one system, not two – all students are general education students first.

• Classification problems: defining a comparison group, the academic skills/abilities to be evaluated and the criteria for progress. E.g. student must demonstrate a ‘dual discrepancy’ in which slope and final level are both at least 1 SD below those of peers/norm-referenced standard

• Validity: inadequate responders can be clearly differentiated from other low achievers in terms of cognitive correlates, prognosis and neurobiological factors (e.g. predominant right hemisphere activity).

Exclusionary factors

• Exclusionary factors have been a required part of an initial evaluation for special education for a long time, but have often been a mere check box rather than a critical element of the evaluation¹¹.

• Exclusions must be seen as policy-based determinations to facilitate service delivery and to avoid mixing of funds, not as classification factors that have strong validity.

• Different intervention needs? E.g. children whose primary language is a minority language BUT the same interventions promote reading success in economically disadvantaged and DL children.

• Policy decisions: need to avoid the mixing of special education and compensatory education funds (USA¹²): exclusionary criteria are not meant to preclude children from placement…

• Emotional and behavioral difficulties:

• Problem of co-occurring social and emotional problems -> which disorder is primary? E.g. children with LD may develop behavioral difficulties that are secondary to lack of success in school

• Problem of comorbid ADHD -> profile of cognitive performance ADHD+DL , ADHD+DC and DL, DC is different

11"Discuss how the local evaluation addresses this component of an initial evaluation?"

12"Compare and discuss different state policies"

(12)

ADHD+DL

(13)

ADHD+DC

• Economic disadvantage:

• How race, ethnicity and cultural background might influence school learning¹³ in general and the expression of different types of LDs in particular?

• Children who grow up in economically disadvantaged environments are behind in language development when they enter school. This delay will interfere with the development of reading and math skills.

• Inadequate Instruction:

• Instructional factors are the least frequently examined – but perhaps the most important – exclusionary criteria. Do we have a good understanding of what constitutes adequate instruction?

An integrated model

• U.S. Office of Special Education Programs (2002)

• Comparison of a traditional model and a model based on RTI

13"Look for some research study from your country"

(14)

• Three sets of criteria for identifying students with LDs:

Mass screening -> child as "at risk"

Response to instruction: curriculum-based assessments of the academic domain of concern AND evaluation of the quality of the instruction -> if inadequate response

Level of achievement: norm-referenced assessments (verifying findings from curriculum-based assessments and all academic domains evaluated) -> if low achievement

Comprehensive evaluation that extends beyond the evaluation of the achievement domain: comorbid conditions (parent and teacher rating scales), causes of underachievement (home, language, social factors AND cognitive assessments = intraindividual perspective

• More details [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/soced/III_LD_7.pdf]

3.3. Evaluating LDs

Monitoring Progress

• Assessing the efficacy of the intervention plan: rate of development of a child who is at risk and responding to intervention should be accelerated relative to normative expectations = achievement gap is closing.

• Progress-monitoring tools:

• on a frequent basis

• short, fluency-based probes

• simple to score (for speed and accuracy to determine proficiency)

• word reading accuracy and fluency, math, spelling

(15)

• reading comprehension and composition show less rapid change, no adequate tools

• results are charted

• Curriculum-Based Measurement [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/soced/III_LD_9.pdf] (CBM)

• Dramatic effects on student outcomes when teachers rely on CBM (+decision making rules: goal-raising whenever possible and modifying the instructional program when actual growth rate is less then expected) to inform instructional planning

• Example: AIMSweb tools [http://www.aimsweb.com/products/features/assessments]

• Tests of Early Literacy

• Letter Naming Fluency

• Letter Sound Fluency

• Phoneme Segmentation

• Nonsense Word Fluency

• Tests of Early Numeracy [http://pszichologia.elte.hu/eltetamop412A1/soced/III_LD_10.pdf]

• Oral Counting

• Number Identification

• Quantity Discrimination

• Missing Number

• R-CBM (Oral Reading Fluency)

• MAZE (Reading Comprehension)

• M-COMP (Math Computation)

• M-CAP (Math Concepts and Applications)

• S-CBM (Spelling)

• WE-CBM (Written Expression)

(16)

Evaluating Achievement Domains

• Word recognition: oral reading of lists of real words and pseudowords -> sight word knowledge and capacity for sounding out words

• Reading fluency: words read correctly per minute (WIAT: reading speed during silent reading comprehension)

• Reading comprehension: tests vary in material (sentences, passages, genre), response format (cloze, open- ended questions, multiple choice, think aloud), memory demands, depth of assessment of abstraction of meaning (vocabulary elaboration vs. knowledge, activation of background knowledge). WJ: sentence/

passage and filling in a blank with a missing word vs. Iowa Test of Basic Skills: significant amount of complex text

• Mathematics: computations in a paper-and-pencil format (timed), word problems, WJ: timed assessment of single-digit arithmetic facts

• Written expression: spelling tasks

Assessing contextual factors and related conditions

• Parent and teacher rating scales of behavior and academic adjustment

• Parent-completed developmental and medical history

• IQ

• Language: vocabulary, language proficiency (not native English speaker)

(17)