Project Prepare

Modules

• Assessment
• Family Collaboration
• Individualized Education Program (IEP)
• Integration
• Managing Behavior
• Planning
• P. L. A. Y.
• Technology
• Transition

see also: Overview of Project Prepare Modules

General Introduction

This module is one of nine competency-based personnel preparation modules designed to prepare professionals to employ best practices to meet the special needs of young children with disabilities. Each module was developed by an outstanding team as part of a statewide collaborative effort called Project Prepare. Project Prepare was funded by the Ohio Department of Education, Division of Early Childhood Education in concert with the network of Special Education Regional Resource Centers.

Each module targets a facet of best practice found to be critical in implementing a free appropriate public education specifically for three- to five-year-old children with disabilities. While this is the age focus of Project Prepare the modules are applicable for serving all young children. The module topics are:

• Assessment
• Family Collaboration
• Individualized Education Program (IEP)
• Preschool Integration
• Managing Behavior
• Planning
• Play
• Technology
• Transition

This list of carefully selected topics does not exhaust all aspects of knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values that are important, even essential, in meeting the challenge posed in implementing the amendments, contained in P.L. 99-457, of the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (I.D.E.A.). However, each module does represent a "competency cluster," rather than a single competency, addressing several general objectives, each of which is broken down into specific knowledge, skill, and value/attitude objectives.

The teams were asked to monitor their own work on the basis of carefully determined criteria, which were then used throughout a multi-stage process of review. Several factors were scrutinized in order to keep the content philosophically consistent within each and across all modules. These premises are in harmony with the philosophical position of the Ohio Department of Education, Division of Early Childhood Education which in turn reflects best practices in the field of Early Childhood Special Education. The issues am summarized as follows:

• Developmentally Appropriate Practice in accord with principles set forth by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC).
• Integration of children with disabilities in programs with their typically developing peers.
• Collaborative relationships with families.
• Attention to the special needs of each child with recognition of the child's abilities, as well as disabilities.
• Provision for and valuing of all diversity among young children and their families (e.g., ability, cultural, racial, religious, gender, etc.). A second Criteria the module development teams were asked

to consider in monitoring their work was adaptability. Adaptability was defined in three ways. First, each module needed to be adaptable in a demographic sense, that is, responsive to needs in diverse geographic settings (rural, Urban, suburban) with diverse populations. Second, each module was designed for potential use with three different groups of participants:

• General (e.g., parents, community groups);
• Staff (direct service personnel, such as teachers and therapists);
• Administrators (persons in leadership roles, such as building principals and program directors).

Some of each module's content may be applicable to all three potential "audiences" however, in many instances differentiation of content is appropriate, based on the anticipated needs of participants. Thus, while the same goals are indicated for the three groups of participants, these goals are translated in knowledge, skills, and value/attitude objectives appropriate to each group. Differentiation of objectives by audience and by type is shown in the following matrix taken from one of the modules.

GOALS

KNOW THE LEGAL AND ETHICAL BASISFOR PRESCHOOL INTEGRATION

The third form of adaptability is implied by the term module itself. Each module is intended to have an "accordion-like" quality so that, while each is a complete "package" entailing about five hours of instruction, sections can be selected, at the discretion of the group leader, depending upon: (1) Deeds of the participants, and (2) time availability. The module is also adaptable in the sense that it can be used for individual self-instruction as well as group instruction by a leader.

Other criteria employed in developing and refining the modules were:

• The goals for the module are clear to the leader and to the participants.
• Each activity is congruent with the objective with which it is associated.
• The module is, insofar as possible, self-contained and self-sufficient -- that is, all needed materials are provided or readily available.
• Terms are appropriately used and clearly defined.
• The module is designed to hold the interest and motivation of those using it.

For each objective, a matrix identifies enabling activities, resources for use in conducting these activities, and leader notes (suggestions, possible supplemental materials, etc.). The following example of a matrix from one module is representative of this plan of organization and illustrates how resources and notes are linked to activities.

• LEVEL: STAFF
• GOAL: Comprehend the significance of play in the development of young children.
• COMPETENCY TYPE: KNOWLEDGE
• OBJECTIVE: Participants will understand (recognize) the relationship between play and the developing child.

Enabling Activities - This column lists the recommended activities that will lead to the accomplishments of the objectives.
Resources - The materials listed in this column are those needed to complete the recommended activities.
Leader Notes - Special recommendations to the in-service leader on conducting the suggested activities are provided in this column.

MULTI-STAGE PROCESS OFDEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW

Having identified their respective topics, the teams developed their modules during the 1990-91 school year, sharing progress reports at a series of planning meetings. This stage culminated in more formal presentations of the "work-in-progress" to members of all module development teams. Project Prepare staff, and a Reactor Panel. Comments and suggestions elicited through this process were incorporated in feedback meetings of the Reactor Panel with each team.

Throughout the 1991-92 school year, a two-stage field test procedure was implemented. First, each team presented a five-hour training session of their module at a primary training site, Evaluation data obtained from these sessions included feedback from the leaders, the participants, and also an invitational group of observers. Observers included steering committee members, members of other teams, and project coordinating staff. Participants in each primary training session were given, the opportunity to participate in secondary training, that is, to conduct a five-hour training session using any of the nine modules, providing similar evaluation data. A total of 18 secondary training sessions were held- The results of the primary and secondary training yielded data used in considering modifications.

Overall, both participants and leaders who supplied feedback on the field test sessions were very positive about the training and materials. A total of 484 surveys were completed by in-service participants. Those who responded represented individuals from diversely populated areas: rural (37%), urban (16%), urban and suburban (14%), rural, urban and suburban (14%), suburban (8%), and rural and urban (7%). Almost all (98%) felt that the activities presented at their sessions related to the in-service topic. A similar response was found for consistency with philosophical premises. Most believed that the in-service training was consistent with developmentally appropriate practice (98%), exceptionality appropriate practice (90%), integration (91%), and family and professional collaboration (93%). The majority of those who did not respond positively to these items on consistency "did not know" whether or not there was consistency.

The greatest amount of disagreement was found on the item which asked whether the training was sensitive to multicultural issues. Seventy two percent of those responding indicated "yes," while 16% said "no" and 16% "did not know." As a result of this feedback the issue of sensitivity to diversity was strengthened in the materials during the final revision.

Additional positive feedback from participants showed that 93% felt that activities were appropriate for the audience, 96% believed the interest level was acceptable or terrific and 95% would recommend the training to others. No significant differences were found among responses from different types of audience participants (i.e., teachers, psychologists, parents, etc.) or among groups from varied populations (i.e., urban, rural, suburban, etc.).

The feedback provided by the 21 in-service leaders who completed response surveys was quite similar to that shared by the participants. Most (91%) felt that the materials allowed them to meet their objectives and that activities related to the goals stated in the modules. Almost all believed that the materials were consistent with developmentally appropriate practice (95%), exceptionality appropriate practice (95%), integration (94%), and family and professional collaboration (95%). Sixty three percent of the leaders responding believed that the materials were also sensitive to multicultural issues, while 31% "did not know," and 5% felt that they did not adequately address this premise. As stated above, this information was used to identify and make needed revisions.

In addition, most leaders (88%) found the activities to be appropriate for all audience participants and that materials were designed to accommodate various audiences (91%). All (100%) found the interest level to be acceptable or terrific. Seventy five percent of the leaders noted that all required materials were provided and 95% believed that module materials could be used for in-service training sessions that varied in length (i.e., amount of time).

In regard to the use of the modules by leaders, most found them easy to use (95%), well organized (84%), to have clear directions (94%), and to have clear (100%) and complete (89%) leader notes. Minor revisions were made following the field test to increase these characteristics in the set.

Strong support by the leaders for the competency-based modules was found in the fact that all (100%) reported that they would use the same module again and many (89%) said that they would use other modules in the set. Finally, all leaders (100%) indicated that they would recommend the modules to other professionals who conduct in-service training.

Each module development team having made every effort to insure that their product satisfied each of the basic criteria, then used the feedback to refine and modify their final product. During the entire process each module was subjected to conscientious and detailed peer review. Directives ranged from minor editorial changes to significant and substantive additions, deletions, and re-workings. Team cooperation and genuine enthusiasm was evident throughout the entire process, as was their creativity, resourcefulness, thoroughness, and skill. Their efforts combined with the expertise and conscientious work of the Project's Steering Committee, cross-module review teams, the Reactor Panel, internal and external expert reviewers, and the Project Consistency/Finalization Task Force. made for a truly collaborative project and a total quality product.

Search CLAS Materials Return to CLAS Home Page