Students With Severe Speech and Physical Impairments

Zascavage, Victoria; Keefe, Charlotte Hendrick

doi:10.1177/10442073070180010401

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, of substantial significance were the results indicating a combination of strong technical and personal support for these students' reading and writing development. This is in contrast to earlier research, which shows that students with SSPI often meet opportunity barriers to literacy learning (Zascavage & Keefe, 2004). The students in our study may have been exceptions within Swedish schools, with better learning opportunities than other students with SSPI.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Experiences about Reading and Writing Development Narrated by Students with Severe Speech and Physical Impairment

Atterström

Malmqvist

Anderberg

et al. 2021

International Journal of Disability, Development and Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Earlier research shows an arrest in reading and writing development among 9-12-year-old students with severe speech and physical impairment, SSPI. This article explores what five students with SSPI who have reached beyond beginner's phase without arrest in their literacy development have experienced as significant for their reading and writing development. The research design was explorative and case based. It contained researcher-participant longitudinal dialogues focusing on the students' experiences of literacy learning. Computer assisted email interviews were used. A semi-structured interview manual guided each dialogue. With the use of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems and assistive technology devices, the participants could read and write (with alphabetical print in Swedish) independently. The analysis revealed four themes of great importance for the students' development of alphabetical print literacy skills: assistive technology use in writing and reading, continuity in long-term pedagogical relationships, mutual persistence in communication, and visions of nearer goals and future work life. The results are discussed in relation to the theoretical frameworks of self-efficacy and the capability approach.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Experiences about Reading and Writing Development Narrated by Students with Severe Speech and Physical Impairment

Atterström

Malmqvist

Anderberg

et al. 2021

International Journal of Disability, Development and Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although not explicitly stated as such, the five essential areas make it clear that conventional forms of reading and writing are what comprise literacy. Although some students with intensive needs for support can develop conventional reading and writing skills, our concern is that the legislation founded on the NRP report (i.e., NCLB) and its implied narrow definition of literacy has the potential to lead to inappropriate literacy instruction for students with extensive needs for supports or leave these students out of the literacy picture altogether (Downing, 2005;Kliewer & Biklen, 2007;Koppenhaver & Erickson, 2003;Mirenda, 2003;Naraian, 2010;Zascavage & Keefe, 2004). We have personally witnessed both of these outcomes in our work with local school districts as they struggle to comply with the requirements of NCLB.…”

Section: National Reading Panelmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is Literacy? The Power of a Definition

Keefe¹,

Copeland²

2011

Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People with extensive needs for support represent the last group of people routinely denied opportunities for literacy instruction. One of the major reasons for this lack of opportunity can be related to limited definitions of what constitutes literacy as a whole and reading and writing in particular. This article will explore the way in which definitions of literacy impact literacy opportunities for individuals with extensive needs for supports. We propose a set of core definitional principles and make explicit the assumptions underlying their inclusion. Our hope is that this will lead to a dialogue about how we define literacy and the implications this holds for the lives of people with extensive needs for support. Our work is based on the assumption that all individuals with extensive needs for support are fully capable of benefiting from literacy instruction and further that our field as a whole could benefit from a more optimistic and inclusive approach to literacy instruction. We conclude that the way in which we define literacy is powerful and essential to opening the final frontier of literacy opportunities to include people with extensive needs for support.

show abstract

“…Secondly, future investigations should consider using the NDAPD to assess PA skills in other children who have difficulty producing verbal (oral) speech, such as children who are non-speaking. Children who are non-speaking have difficulty developing age-appropriate reading skills [39]. Given that poor PA skills have been linked to poor reading skills, information about underlying phonological representations in children who are non-speaking can guide instruction in PA and reading.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%