1 Literacy & ASD

2 Literacy - Definition Reading Writing Speaking Listening Pragmatics Critical Thinking Engagement in Literacy Experience Carnahan & Williamson (Eds), 2010

3 Engagement in Literacy Experiences

4 Reading – National & State Attention National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) 2015 29% of Michigan students score at or above proficient in reading at the beginning of 4th grade (Rank 3-16th). AUTISM? National Data:

5 Reading and ASD Limited solid data;Evidence that decoding & word recognition develop with same processes as typically developing students and often at a faster rate but that comprehension skills do not develop alongside word recognition skills; More than 65% of students with ASD with measurable reading skills demonstrate comprehension difficulties. Randi, Newman & Grigorenko, 2010

6 HOW TO TEACH STUDENTS WITH ASD TO READMeaningful Access to Authentic Curriculum

7 The Dynamic Relationship Between Content, Curriculum and Student Learning: Three Primary FindingsThe amount, type, and quality of interactions between students with extensive support needs and their typical peers were better in general education contexts. Services in general education contexts could be superior to those in self-contained settings with respect to: The quality of student Individualized Education Programs, the aspects of instruction and the overall program provided The amount of time that teachers provided instruction The amount of time students were engaged in instruction and social interactions with general education classmates When these student received services in inclusive general education contexts, their learning outcomes could be better across skills areas and activities including: Social competence Language Development and Use Literacy General education content areas The Dynamic Relationship Between Context, Curriculum, and Student Learning: A Case for Inclusive Education as a Research-based Practice. Jackson, Ryndak, & Wehmeyer, (2010).

8 Rationale for Segregated Programming Simply Not SupportedStudy: 7 years; 6 self-contained; 5 districts; 3 states Rationale: Community (i.e. more protective environment) Not purposefully created or given much attention Evidence that it, in fact, was the opposite Less Distractions: SC more frequent; more severe Curriculum and Instruction: (structure; individualized) Less structure than gen ed Context-Free / Meaningless Curriculum (i.e. little inquire-based / cooperative learning; often “seat work;” no connection to gen ed) No Specially Trained Instructor – mostly parapros Behavior Supports: Confrontational staff; Few attempts to understand or respond to function; Contingent removal; Use of time out / restraints Does Self-Contained Special Education Deliver on Its Promises? A Critical Inquiry Into Research and Practice. Causton-Theoharis, Theoharis, Orsati, Cosier, (2011)

9 LRE=General EducationThere is STRONG Evidence that Student with “Extensive Support Needs” Acquire skills and content knowledge (including literacy) in general education with rigorous instruction and UDL-based adaptations (e.g. differentiated instruction; universal supports, literacy supports (Kluth)) Are BEST served by educational teams that approach their education with the intent of finding solutions to access and learning barriers rather than alternative placements. Involvement and Progress in the General Education Curriculum for Students With Extensive Support Needs: K-12 Inclusive-Education Research and Implications for the Future. Ryndak, Lewis & White, (2013).

10 Kurth & Mastergeorge, 2010 15 Ss w/ ASD (not AS) – 12 males7-9th grade; years old 7 >80% day in gen ed 8 self-contained >50% Measures: Cognitive GE mean 64.9; SC mean 60.0 Adaptive GE mean 44.4; SC mean 42.3 Academic Reading GE mean 67.6; SC mean 13.1 Writing GE mean 83.6; SC mean 14.1 Math GE mean 77.4; SC mean 8.5 Academic and Cognitive Profiles of Student with Autism: Implications for Classroom Practice and Placement. International Journal of Special Education, 25 (2), 8-14.

11 Programs with High Reading Proficiency(National Reading Panel, 2000)

12 Principles for Promoting Inclusive Literacy PracticesMaintain High Expectations Provide Models of Literate Behavior (Peer to Peer) Elicit Students’ Perspectives (Use Preferred Interests) Promote Diversity as a Positive Resource -- LRE Adopt “Elastic” Instructional Approaches (e.g. Pacing) Use Flexible Grouping Strategies Differentiate Instruction

13 Methods to Enhance Literacy “Elastic” ProceduresVisual supports, maps, and supplemental materials / instruction Priming for background knowledge Peer – mediated instruction Use of high interest materials Engaging learners before, during and after reading Use of Interactive books and PPT Carnahan & Williams, 2010; Carnahan, Williams & Haydon, 2009; Brown, Oram-Cardy & Johnson, 2013

14 Guiding Principle “All students, regardless of their perceived functioning level, should have access to quality literacy instruction.” Carnahan & Williamson, 2010

15 All Some Few Reading Instruction and Assessment within aMulti-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) Few Intensive Individualized Interventions Micro-Level Sensitive to Small Changes Over Time Meta-Level (2-3X per mo) Progress Monitoring (e.g. CBM) Targeted Interventions Some Universal Interventions Macro-Level Annual Assessment (e.g. M-STEP; NWEA) All UNIVERSAL DESIGN FOR LEARNING (Johnson & Street, 2013)

16 The DANGER of in Relying on Macro Assessment for Students with ASD

17

18 “Because assumptions, rather than proper assessment and screening, are frequently made about their (i.e. Students w/ ASD) cognitive and communication functioning, they are often excluded from literacy experiences.” (Quality Literacy Instruction for Students with ASD; Carnahan & Williamson, Eds., 2010)

19

20 Formal vs. Informal Literacy AssessmentsStandardized Administration Standardized Norms (criterion; norm-referenced) Typically administered by non-familiar person in non-familiar setting. Informal Literacy Assessments Designed to be used by teachers Used in learning context Sensitive and Recent Observation Analysis of Student Work Samples Student Interview Presentations / Performances IEP Goal Checklists Portfolio Literacy Assessments that Contain BOTH DIBELS / CBM Informal Reading Inventories Unit and/or Chapter Tests

21 Challenges with Formal Reading Assessments for Students with ASDLack of Sensitivity (ability to detect small changes) Lack of Specificity (areas of ASD impacting reading) Assessment & Social Context Restricted Interests = Lack of Motivation Output Differences (Theory of Mind) PRINCIPLE: Use more than one way to assess for reading skills and include informal measures!! Iland, E., 2011 Kluth & Chandler-Olcott, K., 2008.

22 Creative Uses of Standardized Tools “Breaking Standardization”Observe performance under various conditions (e.g. with and without use of visuals supports; preferred interest) Administer subscales or items within subscales in a different order so highly preferred tasks can follow less preferred ones to increase motivation; Start at the beginning of a particular subscale (easiest item) rather than the age-suggested starting point to create behavioral momentum; Take frequent breaks; Use tangible reinforcers; Use a multiple-choice or fill-in-the-blank formats rather than an open-ended; Paraphrase instructions and/or simplify language to match child’s level; Use terms and phrases that are familiar to the child (e.g., “match” vs. “find me another one just like this”) NOTE: Such expansions can be beneficial in capturing rich information on the student’s learning needs, strengths, and challenges, but invalidates obtained scores. Avoid by first administering under standardized conditions.

23 Yes Is the Student Taking State / District Reading Assessment(s) NoProficient? Enhanced Assessment Proficient? Decision-Making Process Yes No Carry On Yes No Teaching Strategies

24 Reading Difficulties Fall in 3 Categories Reading problem is defined as “cannot understand classroom / grade-level materials” Print Skills Ability to translate printed symbols efficiently into spoken language for meaning (e.g. phonics, sight words) Assessment: Read Aloud, CBM Vocabulary Knowledge (Understanding of Terms) Knowledge of key words contained in particular reading selections & concepts being conveyed; meaning related through context. Assessment: questions to elicit understanding of terms Comprehension Strategies Integrating information across text and fix it strategies Assessment: Retell, think aloud during reading, comprehension questions, maze procedures Barr, R. & Blachowicz, C. (2013). Reading Diagnosis for Teachers: An Instructional Approach. Pearson.

25 Assessing for Print Skills

26 Investigate…Investigate…Investigate Individualize Interest Areas How do you know if a student with ASD has print skills, especially if limited functional language skills? Investigate…Investigate…Investigate Individualize Interest Areas Parental Input

27 Katie and Disney

28 Russell and Fast Food

29 Early Literacy Skills Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) (2015) CORE Assessment (2009)

30

31

32

33

34 Why word match to picture PRIOR to letter deletion assessmentWhy word match to picture PRIOR to letter deletion assessment? Many students with ASD learn whole word. If you can find they already have word recognition skills, no need to go back to letter skills. (Kluth, P. & Chandler-Olcott, 2008).

35 Assessing for Vocabulary and Comprehension

36 Look for ANY Evidence of Reading

37 Match Evidence with READABILITY http://www. interventioncentral

38 Women’s Health

39 Better Homes and Gardens

40 Fitness

41 Comprehension Assessment Fluency & Maze Procedures Using Movie Scripts / Closed Captioning for Preferred Interests

42 How to Create a Maze Procedure First, select a passage (at least 300 words)Example: Movie Script Closed – Caption

43 How to Create a Maze PassageGo to Intervention Central’s Maze Passage Generator Enter your Passage Three Steps Distractor Source Sources for Readability Download Student Copy

44 Computer-Generated Distractors

45 Personally-Generated Distractors

46 Learning from the Results

47 Creating a Reading Profile Controlling for Interest Area, Vocabulary & Background Knowledge

48 Example: History Designed for a 7th grade student who demonstrated reading skills but not performing at proficiency on state or district reading assessments. Concerns he was not reading at “grade level” Reports indicated reading skills were highly variable and dependent on: interest level in the text understanding of vocabulary level of engagement on any particular day. The profile data was designed to determine the student’s reading level across interest and vocabulary, understanding the output challenges of individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD).

49

50

51

52

53 Steps to Create a Similar Profile DocumentThe CORE Reading Assessments Steps to the CBM Assessments: Get copy of the full year reading curriculum (ex. science, social studies, lit, etc.) Segment out student high interest text (e.g. topics or material (i.e. Scholastic)). Randomly select passages from both the full year and the high interest text. Type selected passages into the Intervention Central CBM calculator to determine readability: Create probes of the selected text for both Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) – 1 minute probes -- and Maze Passages (comprehension) –3 minute probes– Assess student periodically over the course of 2-3 weeks using the CBM probes. For some of the full reading curriculum passages, assess following pre-teaching of vocabulary and concepts (create background knowledge). Compare results with the CBM norms provided by Hasbrouck & Tindal (2005) or your own state or local norms. Summarize results and behaviors that may have impacted these results.

54 Creating a Reading Profile Template

55 The Top 10: Characteristics of ASD that Impact LITERACYTheory of Mind / Emotional Reciprocity Literal Thinking Repetitive Patterns of Behavior Language & Communication Prior Knowledge Pragmatics Restricted Interests & Motivation Joint Attention & Social Engagement Executive Function Central Coherence The Top 10: Characteristics of ASD that Impact LITERACY

56 Interrelatedness of Characteristics Selection of Top Examples

57 ASD Impact on Literacy Checklist The TOP 10

58 Characteristics of ASD that Impact Literacy Joint Attention & Social Engagement

59 Characteristics of ASD that Impact Literacy Theory of Mind & Social Emotional Reciprocity

60 Characteristics of ASD that Impact Literacy Central Coherence

61 Characteristics of ASD that Impact Literacy Executive Function

62 Characteristics of ASD that Impact Literacy Restricted Interests and Motivation

63 Characteristics of ASD that Impact Literacy Prior Knowledge

64 Characteristics of ASD that Impact Literacy Literal (vsCharacteristics of ASD that Impact Literacy Literal (vs. Abstract) Thinking

65 Characteristics of ASD that Impact Literacy Pragmatics

66 Characteristics of ASD that Impact Literacy Repetitive Patterns of Behavior

67 Characteristics of ASD that Impact Literacy Language, Communication & Vocabulary

68 HOT of the PRESS

69

70

71 Next Steps Match strategies to CharacteristicsPilot use of the checklist and get feedback Understanding of the areas (i.e. characteristics) Ease of use of the tool Covers all or most relevant areas Ideas for improvement Match strategies to Characteristics

72 Barr, Blachowicz, C. Bates, A. Katz, C. Kaufman, B. (2013)Barr, Blachowicz, C. Bates, A. Katz, C. Kaufman, B. (2013). Reading Diagnosis for Teachers: An Instructional Approach (6th Ed.). Pearson. Brown, H., Oram-Cardy, J. & Johnson, A. (2013). A Meta-Analysis of the Reading Comprehension Skills of Individuas on the Autism Spectrum. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43, Carnahan, C. & Williamson, P. (Eds) (2010). Quality Literacy Instruction for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders. AAPC. Carnahan, C. Williamson, P. & Haydon, T. (2009). Matching Literacy Profiles with Instruction for Students on the Spectrum: Making Reading Instruction Meaningful. Beyond Behavior, 19, Consortium on Reading Exellence (2008). Assessing Reading: Multiple Measures. Arena Press. Honig, B. Diamond, L. & Gutlohn. L, (2013). Teaching Reading Sourcebook. Arena Press. Iland, E. (2011). Drawing a Blank: Improving Comprehension for Readings of the Autism Spectrum. AAPC

73 Intervention Central (2015) Curriculum-Based Measurement Warehouse. Johnson, K. & Street, E. (2013). Response to Intervention and Precision Teaching: Creating Synergy in the Classroom. Guildford Press. Kluth, P. & Chandler-Olcott, K. (2008). A Land We Can Share: Teaching Literacy to Students with Autism. Brooks. Knight, V. & Sartini, E. (2015). A Comprehensive Literature Review of Comprehension Strategies in Core Content Areas for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 45, Randi, J, Newman, T. & Grigorenko, E. (2010). Teaching Children with Autism to Read for Meaning: Challenges and Possibilities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 40(7), University of Oregon Center on Teaching and Learning (2015). U/O DIBELS Data System. https://dibels.uoregon.edu/ .