No abstract

Little is known about the content and quality of reading instruction provided to students with intellectual disability. This study aimed to describe the reading instruction provided to students with intellectual disability who were not yet readers in self-contained elementary classrooms. The teachers of 24 classrooms participated in the study. Systematic observations of reading lessons, follow-up interviews with the teachers, review of teaching material, and content analysis of students’ individualized education plans were conducted. Findings indicate that phonics and phonological awareness were taught in most of the classrooms. However, phonics was taught systematically, as recommended in the research, in only less than half of the classes. Sight-word instruction and vocabulary instruction were observed in more than half of the classes. Comprehension instruction of texts read aloud by the teacher was observed in only about a third of the classrooms. Recommendations to support teachers in enhancing the quality of reading instruction are provided.

Is taking the arm of a woman with an intellectual and developmental disability (I/DD) and pulling her along in order to carry out a routine domestic task an abusive practice? In spite of the existence of some approved definitions, the interpretation of the situation observed may lead to different opinions about what is considered abuse.With this in mind, the authors compare social and legal points of view via an exploratory study. A vignette was submitted to a legal adviser, two groups of parents of people with I/DD (n = 11 and n = 7) and two groups of direct-care professionals (n = 12 and n = 11). The vignette portrayed a realistic scenario in which a care professional, bristling with impatience at the slow pace of activity of a middle-aged woman with I/DD, urges her—in what may or may not appear to be an excessively forceful manner—to attend to a task. The corpus is composed of the legal adviser’s analysis, data from the focus group and questionnaires filled out by the focus group participants. The legal analysis concludes that although they are not trivial, it is quite unlikely that the facts subjected for review would lead to legal proceedings. On the other hand, from the social perspective, both the parents and direct-care professionals saw the actions as an unacceptable infringement and a violation. The authors address the risk of the legal system only being concerned with more extreme “caregiving” practices. The application of a case study approach showed the usefulness of looking at “borderline” situations that are not actually covered by existing laws. The results indicate the need for more pronounced action, specifically in devising professional codes of practice

No abstract

No abstract