Effect of an intervention on teachers’ and teaching assistants’ attitudes and academic expectations concerning the educational inclusion of students with Down’s Syndrome

Mora-Castelletto, Valentina; Muñoz-Montes, María Magdalena; Pozo-Tapia, Francisca; Fuentes-López, Eduardo; Alves, Giorvan Ânderson dos Santos; Rivera-Bahamonde, Carla

doi:10.1590/1982-0216/20212368421

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

ORIGINAL ARTICLES • Rev. CEFAC 23 (6) • 2021 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-0216/20212368421 copy

Effect of an intervention on teachers’ and teaching assistants’ attitudes and academic expectations concerning the educational inclusion of students with Down’s Syndrome

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Purpose:

to assess the effect of an intervention on educational teams’ attitudes and academic expectations concerning the inclusion of students with Down’s Syndrome (DS), in Chile.

Methods:

a quasi-experimental single-group study was carried out, with an interdisciplinary pilot intervention held comprising three workshops on inclusive education for teachers and teaching assistants. The Attitudes Towards and Academic Expectations For Down’s Syndrome Students questionnaire (CAEASD in Spanish) was used to assess these variables pre- and post-intervention.

Results:

48 subjects participated in this study, with 37 in the experimental group and 11 in the control group. No significant differences were observed in the overall CAEASD score, neither before nor after the intervention (p=0.388). However, in the actions part of the attitude component, there was a significant difference in the experimental group (p<0.05), in which, the proportion of positive changes in the overall CAEASD score was also greater than that in the control group.

Conclusion:

mentoring had a positive impact on educational teams’ attitudes towards students with DS, helping to develop an inclusive educational community.

Keywords:
Attitude; Down’s Syndrome; Education; Learning; Mentoring; Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences

	Experimental group (n=37)	Control group (n=11)
Age n (%)
21-30	3 (8.1)	1 (9)
31-40	10 (27)	3 (27.3)
41-50	7 (18.9)	3 (27.3)
51-60	10 (27)	2 (18.2)
61-70	4 (10.8)	2 (18.2)
Other	3 (8.1)	0 (0)
Role, n (%)
Teacher	17 (45.9)	9 (81.8)
Assistant	18 (48.6)	1 (9)
Unknown	2 (5.4)	1 (9)
DS teaching experience in years, n (%)
Between 0 and 5	23 (62.2)	9 (81.8)
Between 6 and 10	5 (13.5)	0 (0)
Between 11 and 15	0 (0)	0 (0)
Between 16 and 20	0 (0)	0 (0)
Over 20	1 (2.7)	2 (18.2)
No experience	8 (21.6)	0 (0)
Personal experience of DS, n (%)
Yes	18 (48.6)	7 (63.6)
No	17 (45.9)	4 (36.4)
Other	1 (2.7)	0 (0)
Unknown	1(2.7)	0 (0)
Formal DS training, n (%)
Yes	4 (10.8)	7 (63.6)
No	33 (89.2)	4 (36.4)

	Control group			Experimental group
	Pre-intervention average (p25-p75)	Post-intervention average (p25-p75)	p-value^a	Pre-intervention average (p25-p75)	Post-intervention average (p25-p75)	p-value^a
CAEASD scores
Global score	3.69 (3.42-3.87)	3.65 (3.26-3.84)	0.225	3.61 (3.32-4.10)	3.74 (3.58-3.81)	0.388
Emotions subscale	3.90 (3.60-4.30)	3.80 (3.40-4.40)	0.079	4.20 (3.60-4.60)	4.40 (3.80-4.60)	0.115
Actions subscale	3.37 (3.06-3.50)	3.38 (2.88-3.63)	0.114	3.38 (2.88-3.63)	3.75 (3.5-4.0)	<0.05
Beliefs subscale	3.50 (2.90-3.60)	3.30 (3.00-3.50)	0.786	3.40 (3.00-3.90)	3.15 (3.10-3.30)	0.100
EEASD score
Global score	4.13 (3.88-4.25)	3.88 (3.88-4.50)	0.500	4.00 (3.50-4.38)	4.13 (3.88-4.25)	0.211

Claims	Average	P25-P75
1. The workshops helped me recognize the characteristics of students with Down’s Syndrome.	5	4-5
2. The workshops helped me recognize inclusive strategies that I already use in the classroom to encourage different students’ learning.	5	5-5
3. The workshops helped me find out more about new strategies and resources to help students with Down’s Syndrome learn.	5	4-5
4. The content of the workshops were relevant and	5	4-5
well-chosen.	5	4-5
5. The teaching methods used helped me learn during the workshops.	5	4-5
6. The resources used were of a high quality and relevant to the topic being taught.	5	4-5
7. The workshops were generally well-organized and encouraged participant participation.	5	4-5
8. The amount of time dedicated to each aspect of the workshops was adequate and appropriate.	5	4-5
9. The speakers were approachable and created a pleasant environment for participation and learning.	5	5-5
10. The speakers were knowledgeable about the topic and clear when imparting content.	5	5-5
Overall survey score	4.9	4.5-5

	Aim	Content	Methodology	Materials
Workshop 1*: Inclusive education for students with Down’s Syndrome	To reflect on inclusion and Down’s Syndrome.	The concepts of inclusion, special educational needs and the characteristics of people with Down’s Syndrome.	The workshop started with an activity involving mime. Theoretical content was then mentioned about inclusion in education. There was a practical activity to dispel the myths about Down’s Syndrome. Finally, videos of testimonies of adults with Down’s Syndrome were shown to encourage reflection among the participants.	PowerPoint presentation, speakers, projector and fact and fiction signs.
Workshop 2*: What can we do to include students with Down’s Syndrome?	To identify inclusive strategies used in the classroom.	The Universal Design for Learning (UDL) was mentioned, specifically the first principle of ‘Providing multiple means of representation’. In addition, the characteristics of the learning process of people with Down’s Syndrome were described, as well as strategies to make the learning of students with this condition easier.	To start, a home-made video called ‘Down’s Syndrome and Inclusion’, was shown. Then, a trivia game was played based on its content. Next, the UDL was addressed and a practical activity carried out to introduce the UDL’s first principle. Strategies were then provided to tackle the education of students with Down’s Syndrome, which were put into practice by looking at a case study. Finally, the participants were invited to reflect on the topics dealt with.	PowerPoint presentation, speakers, projector, videos, headphones, masks and boxes.
Workshop 3*: Inclusive strategies for diversity	To identify different learning opportunities to respond to diversity in the classroom.	Attention was paid to the second and third principles of the UDL: ‘Providing multiple means of action and expression’ and ‘Providing multiple means of engagement’.	First a game was played to remind the participants of the contents mentioned in the previous workshop. Then, the remaining UDL principles were discussed. Next, the group worked together to solve a case. To finish off the training activity, the main concepts dealt with were reinforced.	PowerPoint presentation, speakers and projector.
Talk: Inclusive practices to improve the learning expectations and attitudes of teachers and assistant towards students with Down’s Syndrome at primary schools in the San Bernardo neighborhood**	To provide inclusive practices for students with Down’s Syndrome.	The concepts of inclusion, special educational needs, the characteristics of people with Down’s Syndrome and how they learn were dealt with. Strategies for working with and evaluating students with Down’s Syndrome were also provided.	The talk began by mentioning theoretical content about inclusion in education. Then, the generalities of people with Down’s Syndrome were described and more detail gone into regarding how they learn, how they should be schooled and how they should be evaluated. The talk ended by reflecting on the vocabulary that should be used to refer to people with Down’s Syndrome. At the end, each participant received a brochure with supplementary material.	PowerPoint presentation, projector and brochure.

ABRAMO Associação Brasileira de Motricidade Orofacial Rua Uruguaiana, 516, Cep 13026-001 Campinas SP Brasil, Tel.: +55 19 3254-0342 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revistacefac@cefac.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Corresponding address: Carla Rivera-Bahamonde, Carrera de Fonoaudiología, Departamento Ciencias de la Salud, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Avenida Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Macul, Código Postal: 7820436 - Santiago, Chile, E-mail: criverab@uc.cl