The Effect of Performance Feedback Provided to Student-Teachers Working with Multiple Disabilities

Abstract

The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of performance feedback (PF) provided to student teachers working with students with multiple disabilities and visual impairment (MDVI) on their teaching skills. The study group of the research was composed of 11 student teachers attending to the final year of the Teaching Students with Visual Impairments Program at a university in Ankara, Turkey. A quasi-experimental design, was used in the study. These student teachers recorded their classes for pretest and posttest and these video-recorded classes were thereafter watched by the observer, who completed semi-structured observation forms for each student teacher. The results of the analysis suggested a statistically significant difference between the pretest and posttest scores of the student teachers involved in the study before and after the performance feedback. The findings of the study were discussed in the light of the relevant literature and practical recommendations were included

Keywords

• Severe disability, multiple disability, student teacher, performance feedback

Kaynakça

1. Akalin, S. (2014). Performansgeribildirimiileogretmenlerinmeslekigelisimlerinidestekleme. Ankara Universitesi Egitim Bilimleri Fakultesi Ozel Egitim Dergisi. 15(1), 57-68.
2. Akalin, S., & Sucuoglu, B. (2015). Effects of classroom management intervention based on teacher training and performance feedback on outcomes of teacher-student dyads in inclusive classrooms. Educational Sciences: Theory and practice, 15(3), 739-758. doi: 0.12738/estp.2015.3.2543
3. Akin, U., & Kocak, R. (2007).The relationship between teachers’ classroom management skills and job satisfaction. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 51, 353-370.
4. Balci, A. (2007). Sosyal bilimlerde arastirma yontem, teknik ve ilkeler. Ankara: Pegem.
5. Buyukozturk, S. (2012), Sosyal bilimler icin veri analizi el kitabi. Ankara: Pegem.
6. Codding, R. S., Livanis, A., Pace, G. M., & Vaca, L. (2008). Using performance feedback to improve treatment integrity of class wide behavior plans: An investigation of observers’ reactivity. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 41, 417-422. doi:10.1901/jaba.2008.41-417.
7. Cooper, O.J., Heron, E.T., & Heward, L.W. (1987). Applied behavior analysis. Ohio: Merrill.
8. Collins, B. C. (2007). Moderate and severe disabilities: A foundational approach. New Jersey, NJ: Pearson Education.

9. Cushman, C. (2004). Perkins activity guide and resource guide. Heydt, K., Allon, M., Edwards, S., Clark, M. J., Cushman, C. (Principal Authors). Watertown, MA: Perkins School for the Blind.
10. Cuhadar, S. (2008). Use of assistive technologies in the education of the children with autism. 8th The International Educational Technology Conference, Eskisehir, Turkey. Retrieved from http:// ietc2008. home. anadolu.edu.tr/ietc2008/187.doc
11. Darling-Hammond, L., Hammerness, K., Grossman, P., Rust, F., & Shulman, L. (2005). The design of teacher education programs. In L. Darling-Hammond, J. Bransford, P. LePage, K. Hammerness, & H. Duffy (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world. What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 390-441). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
12. Dayi, E. (2011). Ogretmenlik uygulamasi yaklasimlari. Ekev Akademik Dergisi, 48,281-292.
13. Devrim-Dayi, E. (2009). Oğretmen adaylarinin oğretme becerilerini edinmelerinde, ipucu ve donut verilerek yapilan ogretim ile sadece donut verilerek yapilan ogretimin etkililigi, verimliligi, sureklilige ve genellemeye olan etkileri (Doctoral Thesis). Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey. Retrieved from https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
14. Devrim-Dayi, E., & Ozyurek, M. (2011). Ogretmen adaylarinin ogretme becerilerini edinmelerinde, ipucu ve donut birlikte ve sadece donut verilerek yapilan uygulamanin etkililigi, verimliligi, sureklilige ve genellemeye olan etkileri. The Journal of SAU Education Faculty, 21, 33-64.
15. Digennaro, F. D., Martnes, B.K., & Kleinmann, A.E. (2007). Comparison of performance feedback procedures on teachers’ treatment implementation integrity and students’ inappropriate behavior in special education classrooms. Journal Of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 447–461.
16. Digennaro- Reed, F. D., Codding, R., Catania C.N., & Maguire, H. (2010). Effects of video modeling on treatment integrity of behavioral interventions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 291–295.
17. Eldeniz-Cetin, M. (2013). Agir ve coklu yetersizligi olan bireylerin tercihlerinin degerlendirilmesi ve secim yapma becerisinin ogretimi (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara, Turkey.
18. Erbas, D., & Yucesoy, S. (2002). Ozel egitim ogretmenligi programlarinda yer alan uygulama derslerini yuruturken kullanilan iki farkli donut verme yonteminin karsilastirilmasi. AnadoluUniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2(1), 109-120.
19. Erbas, D. (2012). Guvenirlik. In E. Tekin-Iftar (Ed.), Egitim ve davranis bilimlerinde tek denekli arastirmalar (12th ed., pp. 109-128). Ankara: Turk Psikologlar Dernegi.
20. Ersoy, A. (2005). Evaluation of classroom setting and teacher’s role in computer course in Elementary education in terms of constructivist learning principles. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 4, 170-181. Retrieved from http://www.tojet.net/articles/v4i4/4420.pdf
21. Fallon, L. M., Collier-Meek, M. A., Maggin, D. M., Sanetti, L. M. H., &Johnson, A. J. (2015). Is performance feedback an evidence-based practice: A systematic review and evaluation. Exceptional Children, 81 (2), 227–246. doi: 10.1177/0014402914551738ec.sagepub.com
22. Gleason, M. M., & Hall, T. E. (1991). Focusing on instructional design to implement a performance-based teacher training program: The University of Oregon Model. Education & Treatment of Children, 14(4), 316.
23. Gilbertson, D., Witt, J.C., Singletary, L.L., & VanDerHeyden, A. (2007). Supporting teacher use of interventions: effects of response dependent performance feedback on teacher implementation of math intervention. Journal Behavioral Education, 16, 311-326. doi: 10.1007/s10864-007-9043-0
24. Gunduz, Y., & Can, E. (2013).The compliance level of primary and high school teachers to Classroom management principles according to student’s views. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 19(3), 419-446.
25. Gokdere, M. (2015). Bilimsel bilgi turleri. Retrieved from http://muratgokdere.net/forstudents/bil.aras.tek.ppt
26. Gurgur, H. (2013). A critical look at the training process in the department of education of the hearing-impaired as a teacher educator: self-study research. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 1(1), 62-87. doi: 10.14689
27. Gurgur, H. (2015). How a teacher educator in the field of the education of hearing-impaired children provides feedback to a student teacher. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(1). doi: 10.14221/ajte.2015v40n1.9
28. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act [IDEA]. (2011). 34 C.F.R., sec. 300.8.(7). Retrieved from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2011-title34vol2/pdf/CFR-2011-title34-vol2-part300.pdf
29. Ingham, P., & Greer, D. R. (1992). Changes in student and teacher responses in observed and generalized settings as a function of supervisor observations. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(1), 153-164.
30. Jolivette K, Stichter J.P, Sibilsky S, Scott T, Ridgley R.(2002). Naturally occurring opportunities for preschool children with or without disabilities to make choices. Education and Treatment of Children, 25, 396–414.
31. Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2000). Models of teaching (6th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
32. Karasar, N. (2013), Bilimselarastirma yontemleri, Ankara: Nobel.
33. Kurt, O. (2012). Guvenirlik. In E. Tekin-Iftar (Ed.), Egitim ve davranis bilimlerinde tek denekli arastirmalar (12th ed., pp. 109-128). Ankara: Turk Psikologlar Dernegi.
34. Louisiana Components of Effective Teaching. (1992). Retrieved from http://www.ulm.edu/ncate/standard%202/Exhibits/2a4.6/5564.pdf
35. McKenney, E. L. W., Waldron, N. & Conroy, M. (2013). The effects of training and performance feedback during behavioral consultation on general education middle school teachers’ integrity to functional analysis procedures. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 23, 63-85. doi: 10.1080/10474412.2013.757152
36. Miller, P. W. (2004). Classroom configuration: An illustrated review for teachers.
37. Mulligan, S. (2003). Assistive technology: supporting the participation of children with disabilities. Young Children, 50-51.
38. Noell, G. H., Witt, J. C., Slider, N. J., Connell, J. E., Gatti, S. L., Williams, K. L., Duhon, G. J. (2005). Treatment implementation following behavioral consultation in schools: A comparison of three follow-up strategies. School Psychology Review, 34(1), 87-106.
39. O’reilly, M. F. (1992). An analysis of supervision procedures to teach systematic instruction competencies to special education student teachers (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign, USA.
40. Ozden, Y. (2007). Sinif icinde ogrenme ogretme ortaminin duzenlenmesi. In E. Karip (Ed.) Sinif yonetimi (6th ed., pp. 36-65). Ankara: Pegem.
41. Ozturk, B. (1995). Genel ogrenme stratejilerinin ogrenciler tarafindan kullanilma durumlari (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Gazi Universitesi, Ankara, Turkey.
42. Ozturk, B. (2001). Derse giris davranislarinin ogretmenler tarafindan kullanilma durumu. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yonetimi, 25, 107-124.
43. Ozyurek, M. (1987). A proposal for definition, prevalence and education of the multiple handicapped children in Turkey. Anadolu Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 2(1), 113-122.
44. Ozyurek, M. ( 2008). Nitelikli ogretmen yetistirmede sorunlar ve cozumler: ozel egitim ornegi. Turk Egitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(2), 189-226.
45. Picard, C. J. (2004). Strategies for effective teaching. In Twenty-First Century. Louisiana: Louisiana Department of Education. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED497756.pdf
46. Scheeler, M.C., Ruhl, K. L. & McAfee (2004). Providing performance feedback to teachers: a review. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(3), 59-70.
47. Shevin, M., & Klein, N. K. (2004) The importance of choice-making skills for students with severe disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 29, 161-168.
48. Solomon, B. G., Klein, S. A. & Politylo B. C. (2012). The effect of performance feedback on teachers’ treatment integrity: a meta- analysis of the single-case literature. School Psychology Review, 41(2), 160-175.
49. Stafford, A. M. (2005). Choice making: a strategy for students with severe disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(6), 12-17.
50. Stanton-Chapman, T. L., & Brown, S.T. (2015). A strategy to increase the social interactions of 3-year-old children with disabilities in an inclusive classroom. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 35(1), 4-14. doi: 10.1177/0271121414554210
51. Stewart, S. C., & Evans, W. H. (1997). Setting the stage for success: assessing the instructional environment. Preventing School Failure, 41(2), 53-56.
52. Safak, P. (2013). Agir ve coklu yetersizligi olan cocuklarin egitimi (2nd Ed.). Ankara: Vize.
53. Safak, P., & Uyar, D., (2015).Teaching choice making to children with severe and multiple disabilities.Turkish Studies. International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 10(3), 779-798. doi: 10.7827/TurkishStudies.7726
54. Tekin-Iftar E., & Kircaali-Iftar, G. (2001). Ozel egitimde yanlissiz ogretim yontemleri (1st ed.). Ankara: Nobel.
55. Timucin, E. U. (2008). Dogrudan davranissal danismanligin birlikte egitim ortamina yerlestirilmis yetersizligi olan ogrencilerin problem davranislarini azaltmadaki etkililigi. (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Gazi Universitesi, Egitim Bilimleri Enstitusu. Ankara.
56. Toro-Zambrana, W. (1996). An evaluation of supervision in a field-based practicum experience in severe disabilities (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Purdue University, Indiana, USA.
57. Turnbull, R., Turnbull, A., Shank, M., & Smith, S., (2004). Exceptional lives. Special education in today’s schools (5th Ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
58. Vuran, S., Ergenekon, Y., & Unlu, E. (2014) Training process cycles for speacial educationteachers and university supervisors: A Turkish context. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practise, 14(1), 282-295. doi: 10.12738/estp.2014.1.1563
59. Yildiz, S. (2010). Opening a gateway to future for disabled people through information and communication technologies. The Journal of International Social Research, 3(11), 613-620.
60. Westling, D. L., & Fox, L. (2009). Teaching students with severe disabilities (4th. ed.). Pearson. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prenlice-Hall.
61. Witt, J. C., Noell, G.H., Lafleur, L.H., & Mortenson, B.P. (1997). Teacher use of interventions in general education settings: measurement and analysis of the independent variable. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30(4), 693-696.