There has been a large amount of information with varying conclusions and recommendations published about ad/hd
Download 219.16 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Statistical Treatment
- Years Teaching
- Statistical Data Results
- 1. Do you feel the number of computers in your classroom is adequate to meet the needs of your students
- 2. Was the use of technology included or required in your personal college curriculum towards your degree
- 3. Have you attended seminars or training emphasizing technology in education since your college graduation
- 61 4. Are you comfortable using technology to enhance your curriculum
- 5. What would prevent you from pursuing further training in technology formats designed for the classroom
- 6. Have you taken a course or attended a seminar in which AD/HD Learning Styles have been studied or discussed
- 7. In your opinion, is AD/HD over diagnosed
- 8. Is AD/HD a learning disability, mental disorder, or both
- 9. Does it make a difference to understand and recognize how AD/HD/AD/HD is classified (LD or MD) when teaching a student with attention deficits
- 67 10. Do you find it challenging to accommodate the AD/HD/AD/HD student
| Participants
The subjects who participated in the survey were randomly selected from three defined regions in Ohio, Northeastern (Cleveland and surrounding areas), Central (Columbus and surrounding areas), and Southern (Cincinnati and surrounding areas). Five hundred-seventy five (575) teachers varying in teaching experience, computer training and skills, grade level, areas of specialization, classroom population, and the number of computers in their classroom were surveyed. Forty-eight (48) of the surveyed subjects were interviewed and observed in the classroom. The nonprobabilistic, theoretical sampling for this study involves a large number of randomly selected participants. A probability sampling is the best method for this qualitative research, in that the study is designed to identify relationship problems linked to occurrences between the teacher and the AD/HD student, not to answer or solve them. The purpose of this qualitative, ex post facto study was to identify more theories of cause for further quantitative research. “Theoretical sampling is the process of data collection for generating theory where by the analyst jointly collects, codes, and analyzes his data and decides what data to collect next and where to find them, in order to develop his theory as it emerges.” (Merriam 2001, page 63) The theoretical method of sampling a broad base of teachers or instructors, Pre-K – 16, is used to identify general teacher attitudes towards the AD/HD student, and build a base of 53 categorized data to generate theories and further research as to the causes and occurrences that contribute to negative classroom attitudes and relationships between the teacher and the AD/HD student. The subjects for this study were randomly chosen from a large and wide spread teacher population in order to generalize the data over the entire population (the larger the field of randomly selected subjects, the greater the ability to generalize findings to the entire population). “In purposeful sampling the size of the sample is determined by informational considerations. If the purpose is to maximize information, the sampling is terminated when no new information is forthcoming from new sampled units; thus redundancy is the primary criterion.” (Merriam 2001, page 64) Redundancy in the responses to the survey questions became apparent after 500 surveys were completed. The study used 575 completed surveys for the data comparison and analysis. Instrument The survey instrument used in this study consisted of 23 questions. The survey was designed to gather information on the teacher’s attitude and perception of technology in the classroom, the student with AD/HD, and how the teacher recognized and considered the learning styles and preferences of all students in the classroom, including the student with AD/HD. The first questions established the demographics of the survey. Questions - 54 established teacher knowledge and attitude concerning AD/HD as a disorder. Questions - addressed teacher knowledge and attitude towards the various individual student learning styles and preferences represented in the classroom. The final questions surveyed the use of assistive technology devices in the classroom. Statistical Treatment Demographic data of the teachers completing the survey were examined and established. The demographic data was broken down into categories: 1.) Mode of Response (Interview, Hard Copy, and Online); 2.) Regions (Northeastern, Central, and Southern, Ohio); 3.) Degree; 4.) Grade Level (PreK- Postsecondary 16); 5.) Years Teaching (1 – 21+), 6.) Courses (Subjects) Taught; 7. ) Size of Class; and 8.) Computers in the Classroom. (See Appendix B) Data from questions 8-15 (Teacher Use of Technology), questions 16-20 (AD/HD in the Classroom), and questions 21-26 (Assistive Technology in the Classroom) were compared against the data from the established demographic data; and averages were calculated and charted on tables (see Appendix C). Additional comments from the participating teachers regarding the individual questions were considered when studying the data and forming conclusions. Comments and data averages from questions 8-15 (Teacher Use of Technology), questions 16-20 (AD/HD in the Classroom), and questions 21-26 (Assistive Technology in the Classroom) were further compared against 55 one another and charted. (See Appendix D) The averaged comparisons were used to determine the predominate teacher attitude and perception of the AD/HD student in the classroom; and to establish if a relationship existed between the teacher attitude and perception the AD/HD student and the use of assistive technology in the classroom. Limitations Although the survey specifically addresses the factors that researchers have shown to have a direct impact on the use of assistive technology in the classroom and facilitating the teacher’s a ability to meet the learning needs of students with learning differences in the traditional classroom, the study presents some limitations. Ex post facto research designs are weak due to the inability to control the variables. The subjects may not be representative of the entire teaching population. Therefore, the sample size and area sampled was large in an attempt to strengthen the study. Most teachers did not identify their school district, so the enrollment and economic status of the schools represented by the participating teachers were unknown (except for the 48 teachers interviewed and observed)’ and the exact number of schools represented could not be determined. The race, gender and age of the teachers (except for the 48 teachers interviewed and observed) also were unknown. For this reason, the actual number of students with AD/HD in the classrooms, actual AD/HD classifications, and student achievement data could not be gathered. 56
Chapter III presented the questions and lay-out of the survey used in this study. The ex post facto research design was explained, and a brief definition was included to point out the weaknesses of the study. The participants were identified as a random selection of 575 teachers in Northeastern, Central, and Southern Ohio. The survey instrument used in this study was identified as a survey consisting of 26 questions that address three specific aspects affecting the education and academic experience of the student with AD/HD: 1.) teacher training and use of technology; 2.) teacher understanding of AD/HD; and, 3.) the use of assistive technology devices in the classroom. Participating teachers were encouraged to comment on any or all of the questions. The statistical treatment and presentation of the data were explained, and the limitations of this ex post facto study were identified, defining the specific weaknesses of the study. CHAPTER IV RESULTS OF THE STUDY The study attempted to identify teacher perception of the AD/HD student in the classroom. It was felt, after a review of the literature and an investigation of research findings documenting the positive impact assistive technology devices has on the AD/HD student’s ability to learn and adapt to the traditional classroom, that teachers incorporating assistive technology devices into their general classroom learning activities, events, and assessments, would have a more positive perception of the AD/HD student in the classroom. Teachers of grade levels Pre-K through Post- Secondary 16 were invited to participate. A printed survey consisting of 28 questions was distributed and returned by teachers in the Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati areas. An online version of the survey also was available. Some of the respondents personally were interviewed by assistants at Cuyahoga Community College (Cleveland), Ohio State University (Columbus), and The University of Cincinnati (Cincinnati). The survey was divided up into three sections. The first 16 questions established the demographics of the population responding to the survey. The next 5 set of questions established the understanding, opinion, and perception the responding population had towards AD/HD. The remaining 7 questions established the attitude of the teacher population responding to the survey towards the 57 58 recognition of different learning styles in the classroom and the use of assistive technology devices in the general curriculum. The teachers were given the opportunity to comment on any or all of the questions and statements. They were encouraged to provide additional comments at the end of the survey. See Appendix A. Statistical Data Results The random sampling consisted of 575 subjects (48 interviewed, 282 returning hard copies of the survey, and 245 submitting the survey online). See Appendix B. The questions that evoked additional comments seemed to be the key questions in identifying the overall teacher perception of the AD/HD student in the classroom and the use of assistive technology devices in the general curriculum. They were as follows: 1. Do you feel the number of computers in your classroom is adequate to meet the needs of your students?
11 of the teachers in Grades 6-12, answering YES, identified themselves as resource and technology lab instructors. 5 of the schools are in partnership with local industry. 6 additional Grades 6-12 teachers commented on the use laptops in their room, 1 of which also used palm devices for science and math projects. 59
Veteran teachers (21+ years) commented on being unsure of how the use of computers, outside of the student typing his/her own paper, would enhance their curriculum. One commented, “If it isn’t broke, why fix it.” The 9 veterans taught English on the senior high grade level. All 9 disapproved or were skeptical of the use of the World Wide Web for research. 2 General and Physical Science teachers answering YES (they had an adequate amount of computers in their classroom) took matters into their own hands and wrote grants for laptops and palm devices in their classrooms. They commented on the ease of finding and receiving the technology grants.
Recent education graduates answering Yes mentioned the emphasis on computer software innovations on the PreK level and the emphasis on technology in their college curriculum; while post-secondary instructors answering NO, in 60
All teachers answering the online survey answered YES. Technology is interpreted as limited to computer-related equipment and software. Some instructors on the post-secondary level commented on their used technology, however their knowledge of particular software was self taught. Again, technology is perceived as computer-related. All teachers with 10 years experience and under have received some technology training after their graduation from college. In-service was cited. Most school districts require so many in-service hours of technology based training per year per year. However, many of the teachers with 21 years or more of service stated they have not attended technology training sessions.
Those answering the survey online had the highest percentage of “Yes” answers. Instructors on a postgraduate level were less willing to revise their curriculum to include various technology formats. One reason cited was the cumbersome curriculum review process at most colleges. Many said it wasn't worth the frustration. Others felt it was the students’ responsibility to use technology to the best of their own abilities and needs. Teachers and instructors with 10 or less years of experience (regardless of grade level) had no problem with incorporating technology (computer-based) into their curriculum.
9 teachers cited they had no need for further technology training. All 14 teachers answering in the "others" category felt it wasn't necessary for their particular area of study or that it suited their teaching methods and style. 283 teachers (Grades 4-12) made mention of the government's emphasis on the 62 proficiency tests as a contributing to the "lack of time" factor. Many faulted the pressures caused by the proficiency tests requirements and rankings as monopolizing the teachers' time and efforts. Out of 575 survey participants, 0 answered Lack of Administration Support. Those who commented felt the administration encouraged them to further their training in the area of technology. Most of the K-12 districts required 3-6 hours (average) of in-service training in technology for their faculty and staff. However, comments were made on sport activities, such as football, that seemed to be the administration’s budget priority. Those that commented felt the sports programs were top priority in the allocation of funds for equipment and staffing. Technology came second and the arts were at the bottom of the list. One comment stated, "They'll (the school board) will approve a state of the art Stairmaster in the state of the art weight room before they'll approve a laptop to be shared by the 30 students in my classroom." 6. Have you taken a course or attended a seminar in which AD/HD Learning Styles have been studied or discussed?
Teachers (Grades K-12) commented that they have attended in-service seminars on learning disabilities, but there wasn't an emphasis on AD/HD in the 63 material. The disorder was discussed in work groups, but it was mostly supported by teachers’ experiences, hearsay, and opinions. Many commented on broadcast and print media as a major influence on their opinion regarding the AD/HD student’s ability to learn and participate in the normal classroom setting. PreK had a high percentage of NO answers. Levels of education and degrees weren’t a factor. Post-secondary instructors commented that by the time the students entered college, they should be responsible for dealing and adjusting with their individual learning difficulties on their own. 4 of the post-secondary instructors answering YES taught child development courses and units on AD/HD were included in their course text and supplemental materials.
This question was answered YES by all respondents. Most everyone had a comment or opinion. Those interviewed displayed negative movements or expressions when asked the question (rolled their eyes, shook their head, breathed a deep sigh, etc.). The hard copy comments reflected the same frustration only in phrases such as "confusing to parent, teachers and students", "used as an excuse for bad behavior", "latest psych ed fad", etc. The online responses were brutal. Some respondents used more earthy vocabulary to express their frustration. One 64 named a local Northeastern Ohio doctor and called him a quack “making money off of parents who don't know how to parent”. Very few of the respondents to this survey knew enough about AD/HD to distinguish the three diagnostic categories of the disorder. Most described the hyperactive and impulsive characteristics when referring to and decribing the student with AD/HD. 38% of the respondents to this survey felt the problem was not a disorder, but poor parenting skills. Other comments included too much sugar and poor dietary habits. A few comments were made regarding too much television and not enough family interaction. One comment was made on obsessive use of hand held video game devices. 8. Is AD/HD a learning disability, mental disorder, or both?
Most teachers thought AD/HD was a learning disability. A few commented that they didn’t believe the disorder existed citing poor parenting, poor diet, and excessive viewing of television. Again, the hyperactive and impulsive characteristics associated with the disorder were given as examples of typical AD/HD behavior. Most of the teachers and instructors knowing that AD/HD is a neurological/ mental disorder were in special education and psychology. 2
All Special Education and Psychology educators answered YES. Many emphasized the danger in recognizing and treating AD/HD as a learning disability. One commented, “Treating AD/HD aggravates the problem for the student with AD/HD. AD/HD is not a learning disability.” In personal observations and interviews with teachers, I noticed a “stubborn resistance” to facts and medical information about AD/HD. It didn't matter what medical or educational research has discovered and documented about AD/HD. Many had formed their own opinion regarding AD/HD from their personal experiences and the opinions of other educators. Media misconceptions
When asked if a student with AD/HD told them she can't do the task; many replied she could if she tried, she just doesn't want to try hard enough. Many commented that the students with AD/HD were over-medicated. Some commented on the medication prescribed for the student with AD/HD student using terms such as "doped up" or "out of it" to describe the condition of the medicated AD/HD student. A few of the teachers interviewed refused to believe the medication prescribed to a student with AD/HD was a stimulant. Medical information was shown to the teachers stating that the stimulant has nothing to do with sedating a student. “The stimulant acts on the area of the brain that causes a person to focus on a task.” The medication causes the student to focus. So if the student was hyper and fidgety prior to the medication and after taking the medication becomes quiet and calm, that is because the student has become focused on his/her task. The medical information was refuted and rejected by some of the teachers. 23 of the interviewed teachers cited negative and misleading information heard on media magazine shows, such as 20/20, to refute the medical information and research on AD/HD. 16 of the 48 interviewed teachers, when asked which source was more credible, the AMA (American Medical Association) or 20/20, choose 20/20 as the more reliable source for accurate information regarding AD/HD.
Comments in the YES column were mixed. Most were negative in nature. Most were frustrated with the impulsive, hyperactive AD/HD student. A majority of the teachers stereotyped the student with AD/HD with the impulsive and hyperactive characteristics of the AD/HD diagnosis. They didn't recognize the AD/HD student with attentive disorders as AD/HD. AD/HD students with attention problems were termed daydreamers, inconsistent, and lazy. Students with attention problems weren’t considered by some of the teachers as being AD/HD. Many commented that those students “just didn’t want to try hard enough.” The positive YES comments came from the Special Education teachers. Once commented, "It is challenging because on-going assessment is needed in order to figure out what works for the child. Finding and accentuating the AD/HD student’s strength and accommodating for the weakness and learning differences are essential." Many answering NO were post-secondary instructors. Again, many felt that by the time the student enters college, the students should be aware of their learning differences and make their own accommodations. 68
Again, in personal observations and interviews with teachers, I noticed a stubborn resistance to learning and receiving the facts and information from the medical and educational research on AD/HD. Most teachers commenting on AD/HD have formed their own opinion as to the cause and effects of AD/HD. As stated above, poor parenting was cited as the chief cause behind the behavioral problems associated with the student with impulsive and hyperactive AD/HD characteristics. 12 of the interviewed teachers commented that the AD/HD diagnosis was used as an excuse for behavioral problems and poor academic performance. The medication controversy was brought out again with this question. One online respondent commented that it was “impossible to accommodate "doped up" or "drugged out" students whose parents don’t give a damn about them”. One of the interviewed teachers, after being shown AMA (American Medical Association) and APA (American Psychology Association) literature on medication (stimulants) prescribed to persons with AD/HD commented, “I see what the medication does to students in my class, and nobody can tell me the medication doesn't act as a sedative. Those kids act as if they were in a drug induced stupor, like they were smoking pot or something." 69
Download 219.16 Kb. Share with your friends:
|