View
1
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SUPPORT PROGRAMME FOR GRADE R TEACHERS TO
FACILITATE KNOWLEDGE OF ATTENTION DEFICIT HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER AND EMERGENT LITERACY IN A DISTRICT OF TSHWANE
Presenter: Dr. Marguerite De Jongh; 27 October 2017
Co-Supervisors (Prof. Wilna Basson & Prof. Anna-Marie Wium)
• Completed - January 2017 @SMU • Why? Embarked on this journey: Both of professional & personal nature • Initial purpose for research: Search for answers – re. management of
ADHD - a multi-dimensional disorder Professional & personal goals included: • To bring about change – HOW colleagues in education view & understand ADHD ; IMPACT learners → ADHD • To make teachers aware of collaboration → role players in SA educational context … (ADHD)
►Develop a support programme - assist Grade R teachers … management
THE PhD JOURNEY … (My story)
•WHAT? ADHD - most common psychiatric disorder → children •Core symptoms (Inattention & Hyperactivity) mostly recognised preschool years (Suvarna & Kamath, 2009)
•Preschool learners → ADHD ►risk developing emergent literacy /EL problems (phonological awareness / PA)
•PA – pre-requisite → development of reading and writing (Sims & Lonigan, 2013; Wessels, 2011).
•Estimate: 60%+ ADHD present with learning disorder •Rationale: Many teachers → insufficient training deal with barriers 2 learning (Wium, 2010) → ADHD & …
•Recognise link → ADHD & EL •Gap identified in literature (internationally)… limited effective ADHD programmes → preschool teachers (Lawrence, 2012)
•Gap identified in literature (SA)… No support programmes → pre-school teachers - ADHD (Kern, Amod, Seabi, & Vorster, 2015).
BACKGROUND; RATIONALE & AIM of the RESEARCH …
►Need identified: Quality support programmes → Grade R educators → inclusive educational environment •Policy changes → SA educational setting: Change → supporting child with barriers 2 learning → supporting the teacher ►will support learners with barriers to learning (ADHD) (Wium & Louw, 2013)
• IMPACT→ development of EL ►reading and writing (Lopes, 2008;
Wessels, 2011)
The AIM of the research: To develop a support programme for Grade R teachers on ADHD and emergent literacy and To determine the efficacy of this programme
BACKGROUND; RATIONALE & AIM of the RESEARCH (Cont’d)
Objective 1 To determine whether the support programme improved the participants’ general knowledge on ADHD Objective 2 To determine whether the support programme improved the participants’ knowledge on the management of ADHD Objective 3 To determine whether the support programme improved the participants’ general knowledge on emergent literacy Objective 4 To determine whether the support programme improved the knowledge of the participants on the management of emergent literacy Objective 5 To compare the knowledge of township and urban Grade R teachers regarding ADHD and emergent literacy after attending the support programme Objective 6 To explore the way in which the support programme was experienced by the participants
OBJECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH
WHAT? Mixed method design, integrating quantitative & qualitative domains to: Address the aim & Confirm & validate findings
• Structure of research → i.t.o. design, implementation & evaluation of programme
•→ provided by various phases & steps of the Intervention Research Model (Thomas & Rothman, 1994)
• Next slide: adapted version of this model (Table 1)
METHODOLOGY …
METHODOLOGY …
Preparation Phase: Planning & Approval
Phase 1: Programme Development
Phase 2: Programme Implementation & Data Collection
Phase 3: Programme Evaluation: Data Analysis & Dissemination of Results
Step 1
Permission from DBE, School
Research Ethics Committee (SREC) and
Medunsa Research Ethics Committee
(MREC)
Step 1
Review relevant literature
Step 1
• Brief district facilitator (DBE)
• Invite teachers to participate in the
support programme
Step 1
Quantitative data analysis (close-
ended questions)
Step 2
Develop baseline questionnaire –
Questionnaire 1
Step 2
Develop the support programme
and training manual
Step 2
Informed consent
Step 2
Qualitative data analysis (open-
ended questions)
Step 3
• Brief district facilitator (DBE)
• Invite teachers to participate in the
support programme
Step 3
• Finalise Questionnaires 1 & 2
• Finalise focus group questions
• Finalise the focus group questions
Step 3
Baseline data collection
(Questionnaire 1: Pre-training)
Step 3
Qualitative data analysis (focus
groups)
Step 4
Programme implementation
Step 4
• Dissemination of results
• Report to the DBE
Step 5
Post-training data collection
(Questionnaire 2)
Step 6
Focus group discussions
Bronfenbrenner’s ecosystemic model (1979; 2005)
ALSO utilised → development of support programme (Figure 1) ► In inclusive educational environments different ecological systems & role players continuously:
Support Interact & Impact on → teachers’ & learner’s development
FRAMEWORK …
FRAMEWORK … (Cont’d) (Figure 1)
CHRONOSYSTEM
Macrosystem: Policy decisons: DoE & DBE (to
instill values, respect, traditions beliefs) that underly
education Exosystem: Education
system, social development, health services, media,
district, community, DBST e.g. therapists, psychologists
etc., resources
Mesosystem: School & home settings
(interaction), HOD, IBST
Microsystem: Relationship between
microsystems: Learner; classroom; school;
peers, teacher, parent
Grade R learner with ADHD
(Age, health, sex, language etc.)
Figure 2.
The support programme ALSO developed & guided by adult learning theories & adult leaning principles & factors influencing professional development (Knowles, 1975)
FRAMEWORK … (Cont’d)
The adult learner
Adult learning theories (& adult learning principles)
Andragogy
Factors influencing adult learning & professional development/training
Implications for the research: Adult learning theories and
factors influencing professional development
• Implemented: District of Tshwane → two groups: included • Attendance: (n=65) = 44 township & 21 urban school Grade R participants; different days • Emphasised Grade R teachers role →identification & management → ADHD related 2 EL • Importance → cooperation between role players stressed (Figure 3)
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAMME
Questionnaires •Two questionnaires completed: Baseline questionnaire & adapted version: Determine Grade R teachers’ knowledge → ADHD & EL
Validity ↑ → triangulating data ► 2 focus group discussions •Additional information obtained – moderator’s field notes
DATA COLLECTION …
Baseline Questionnaire
Training Adapted Questionnaire
Data analysis (Questionnaires) •Descriptive statistics: Raw data (quantitative & qualitative) (pre- & post-training
questionnaires) describe & compare data
• Inferential statistics - analyse quantitative data The Mc Nemar test reflected ‘actual’ improvement in knowledge & indicating statistically significant differences between pre- & post-
training data i.e. to determine if the programme had a positive effect on the teachers’ knowledge ADHD & EL
Fisher exact test: Determine significant differences in knowledge (2 groups → post-training) Results → 2 groups compared (post-training)
DATA ANALYSIS …
Data analysis (Focus group discussions) •Discussions recorded ► quotes transcribed ►translated → English ►information organised & grouped into categories
•► categories analysed ► divided → closed themes ►presented
•►Data analysis: To Provide / formulate → overall description of the outcome of the research → result of training (need of Grade R teachers addressed?)
DATA ANALYSIS (cont’d)
PRE-TRAINING RESULTS: •NB: Difference in pre-training knowledge → 2 groups •Urban participants: Overall better knowledge → ADHD & EL •Urban: More diversity in answers re. management ► •Urban: Hands-on experience & more diversity → type of support provided •Results emphasised INEQUALITIES in education levels of 2 groups
WHY? •Urban: Prior knowledge •Township: Previously disadvantaged •Majority township participants (84.1%) – educational levels →NQF level 5 (vocational certificate), differed significantly (p < 0.001) from urban participants (76.2%) - NQF level 6 & majority on NQF level 7
RESULTS (Questionnaires) …
POST-TRAINING RESULTS As a result of the training: •BOTH GROUPS improved general knowledge → ADHD & knowledge on identification, diagnosis and management of ADHD &
•↑ knowledge ADHD → impact → EL • Increased awareness of multi-modal management options 4 ADHD: Pharmacotherapy (medication) Behavioural & classroom management Different types of support provided (different role players) → inclusive educational environment
RESULTS (Questionnaires) …
CONCLUSION - POST-TRAINING RESULTS (QUESTIONNAIRE) Comparison of results for the 2 groups •Comparable knowledge → both groups •NO STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN THE QUANTITATIVE RESULTS → OVERALL KNOWLEDGE → on ADHD & EL (Table 2)
• … Township participants’ knowledge improved more •THUS: Township participants benefitted MORE → training
Interpretation: • Urban participants → prior knowledge • Inequalities in education levels 2 groups emphasised → scope 4 improvement in knowledge → training → impact on management
RESULTS (Questionnaires – Cont’d)
RESULTS : COMPARISON OF 2 GROUPS (Fisher exact test)
Aspects assessed p-values Statistically significant difference
(Yes/No) for the two groups
Understanding of ADHD 0.194 No
Diagnosis of ADHD 0.122 No
Referral process 0.296 No
ADHD symptoms 0.822 No
Activity levels associated with ADHD 0.456 No
Participants’ opinions on the behaviour of learners 0.217 No
Maturity levels of learners with ADHD 1.000 No
Teacher support for learners with ADHD 0.789 No
External support provided to learners with ADHD 0.789 No
Impact of pharmacotherapy on ADHD behaviour 0.203 No
Characteristics of emergent literacy 0.242 No
Teacher support for emergent literacy 0.655 No
Post-training results (FOCUS GROUPS) •Two main themes (2 groups): Value of the programme Participants’ suggestions /recommendations
•Overall: Positive feedback → 2 groups: Both groups felt empowered Appreciated training Sense of confidence ►indicated enhanced awareness & understanding
of ADHD → EL
RESULTS (Focus group discussion) …
Post-training results • Additional information for development of the programme & future
implementation: Findings → implications future training - teachers in SA context Need: additional training (greater - township participants) - previous inequalities Training – presented - more days Training: Expanded → ALL educators in Foundation Phase Training: Expanded → ALL other stakeholders (e.g. parents)
• Suggestions from participants: Make DBE aware of findings DBE & DoH involved in training of stakeholders & DBE & DoH help raise awareness on ADHD → re. complex nature ADHD Support for teachers → lifelong investment in teachers’ skills
RESULTS (Focus group discussion - Cont’d)
PARTICIPANTS’ FEEDBACK …
“My family asked me whether the course was worth it. I answered yes, they
did not waste my time. I can actually account for what I have learned here
… I felt that I could walk out … and teach somebody else about it.”
(Participant from an urban school context)
“… a burden has come off our shoulders!”
(Participant from a township school context)
•Research contributed: Fields of ADHD & teacher development in SA education landscape Additional: Role of SLT in teacher support Context specific support (township; semi- & rural contexts)
•Training emphasise - need 4 support of Grade R teachers → ADHD & EL • Training emphasised → the significance of identification & management (ADHD) → providing → foundation 4 social development & academic success → ADHD learners
•Training emphasised: Need: Explicit training & resource material (Manual) → ADHD & EL
RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS …
•Teachers’ aknowledged -improved knowledge ►impact on other systems (e.g. home)
• Support programme & resource material → can be adapted → train other role players e.g. parents
“The learner does not exist in isolation from surrounding systems, but rather they help determine success in his or her academic career … If all the systems work well together all learners in schools, even those who
experience barriers, should benefit.” (Mahlo, 2011)
•Support programme presented → by various role players e.g. SLT’s •Study design (embedded in Intervention Research Model (IRM) VALUABLE → duplicated → further research OR → development support programmes in educational contexts &
•Study provided → point of reference 4 adaptation &/ or development of other support programmes (ADHD & EL)
RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS (Cont’d)
SO WHAT?
• SLT’s become involved - development of support programmes for teachers, parents & other role players/ stakeholders on ADHD = need
• Why? Scope of practice: identify, manage, provide different service delivery models i.e. collaborative model (Paul & Norbury, 2012) support teachers (basic education)(Kathard et al. 2011)
• International literature (McCartney et al., 2009) & local literature (Wium & Louw, 2011) –
Teachers benefit - support provided by SLT’s • Estimate: 60% ADHD learners present Language disorders • Estimate: 60%- 95% ADHD learners present Language Learning
Disorder • ADHD impacts on EL / (PA) literacy crisis in SA educ landscape
(Lowest in Southern Africa) • THUS: SLT’s emphasize the link & impact of ADHD; language, literacy &
learning • SLT’s supporting teachers – impact on management of ADHD learners
•SMU → support & infrastructure •DBE → consent 2 conduct research •Supervisors: Prof Wilna Basson & Prof Anna-Marie Wium •SASLHA
In the words of Maya Angelou, the ADHD journey made the researcher
realise that:
“There is no greater agony than bearing an untold story inside you.”
THUS supporting her in preparing the dissertation:
The Development of a Support Programme for Grade R Teachers to Facilitate Knowledge of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and
Emergent Literacy in a District of Tshwane
THANK YOU …
• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. • Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. • Kathard, H., Ramma, L., Pascoe, M., Jordaan, H., Moonsamy, S., Wium, A. M., ... & Khan, N. B. (2011). How can speech-language therapists and audiologists
enhance language and literacy outcomes in South Africa? (And why we urgently need to). South African Journal of Communication Disorders, 58(2), 59. • Kern, A., Amod, Z., Seabi, J., & Vorster, A. (2015). South African Foundation Phase teachers’ perceptions of ADHD at private and public schools. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(3), 3042–3059. Retrieved April 5, 2016 from http://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120303042 • Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. Chicago, IL: Follet • Lawrence, M. (2012). The issues and challenges that Foundation Phase educators experience when teaching learners with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
(ADHD) (Masters research report). University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa. • Lopes, M. A. (2008). South African educators’ experiences of learners who may have ADHD in their classrooms (Unpublished PhD thesis). University of Pretoria,
Pretoria, South Africa. • Louw, B., & Wium, A. M. (2015). The South African national school curriculum: Implications for collaboration between teachers and speech-language therapists
working in schools. South African Journal of Childhood Education, 5(1), 19–41. • Mahlo, F. D. (2011). Experiences of learning support teachers in the foundation phase with reference to the implementation of inclusive education in Gauteng
(Doctoral dissertation). University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa. • Perold, M., Louw, C., & Kleynhans, S. (2010). Primary school teacher’s knowledge and misinterpretations of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). South
African Journal of Education, 30(3), 457–473. • Paul, R., & Norbury, C. (2012). Language disorders from infancy through adolescence: Listening, speaking, reading, writing, and communicating. London: Elsevier
Health Sciences. • Sims, D. M., & Lonigan, C. J. (2013). Inattention, hyperactivity, and emergent literacy: Different facets of inattention relate uniquely to preschoolers’ reading related
skills. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 42, 208–219. doi:10.1080/15374416.2012.738453 • Survana, B. S., & Kamath, A. (2009). Prevalence of Attention Deficit Disorder among preschool children. Nepal Medical College Journal, 11(1), March, 1–4. • Thomas, E. J., & Rothman, J. (1994). Intervention research. New York, NY: Haworth. • Topkin, B., Roman, N. V., & Mwaba, K. (2015). Attention Deficit Disorder (ADHD): Primary school teachers' knowledge of symptoms, treatment and managing
classroom behaviour. South African Journal of Education, 35(2), 01–08. • Wessels, E. (2011). Teacher knowledge and implementation of phonological awareness in Grade R (Unpublished PhD thesis). North West University, Potchefstroom
Campus, South Africa. • Wium, A. M. (2010). The development of a support programme for foundation phase teachers to facilitate listening and language for numeracy (Doctoral
dissertation) • Wium, A. M., & Louw, B. (2013). Revisiting the roles and responsibilities of speech-language therapists in South African schools. South African Journal of
Communication Disorders, 60, 31–37. • Wium, A. M., & Louw, B. (2011). Teacher support: An exploration of how Foundation Phase teachers facilitate language skills. South African Journal of
Communication Disorders, 58(2), 86.
References
Recommended