Using a Community of Practice to Support Technology Integration in Speech-Language Pathologist Instruction

Abstract

Technology tools are in the beginning stages of integration into instructional practices of speech-language pathologists (SLPs). The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of SLPs, as they learned to use a matrix connecting curriculum tasks to technology tools through participation in a community of practice (CoP). The theoretical framework for the study was based on situated learning theory. The study utilized design-based research methods to explore how using the matrix and participating in a CoP affected perceived knowledge, skill levels, and technology integration toward instructional synthesis for a purposeful sample of SLP teachers in the southwestern United States. Field notes, focus group sessions, and communication via e-mail and Facebook™ transcriptions were open coded, then axial-coded for emerging themes and changes in attitude and depth of technology usage. Survey data were analyzed. Overall, findings indicated qualitative changes in teaching practices were due to raised awareness about technology tools and applications through exposure to the matrix and collaboration within the CoP. Implications provide insight on how educators and researchers can improve professional development for technology integration within the SLP teaching environment.

Personal, Cultural, and Institutional Perspectives of Special Education Technology Integrators: A Narrative Inquiry

“…This is also not the norm. Previous research (Courduff & Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2015a, 2015b suggests inconsistency of technology resources provided for general education teachers and special education teachers.…”

“…For the current study, we used a narrative approach in order to develop a holistic understanding of the lived experiences of special educators (Clandinin & Huber, 2010; Clandinin & Connelly, 2000; Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Smith-Chandler & Swart, 2014). We wanted to know what motivated special educators to become such, what compelled them to use technology with students, and what drives them to remain in special education in spite of the known challenges in special education classroom (Courduff, 2011; Courduff & Szapkiw, 2015a, 2015b; Edyburn, 2020; Gomez-Navarro, 2020; Karlsson et al, 2018; Redford, 2019; Thomas et al, 2019). Study findings could provide a deeper understanding of personal, cultural, institutional experiences of special educators in the literature.…”

An American Professor in Armenia: Reflections on Special Education, Speech-Language Pathology, and University Teaching

“…As I explored the topic of technology and applications further with my students, I learned that some of them were adamant about the superiority of traditional therapy methods and materials. This led to engaging discussions about the efficacy of technology and applications and whether their use made an SLP or a teacher of students who are deaf or hard-of-hearing more effective (Beal-Alvarez & Cannon, 2014; Brady, Theimann-Bourque, Fleming, & Matthews, 2013; Chiong & Shuler, 2010; Costigan & Light, 2010; Courduff & Szapkiw, 2015; Da Fonte & Boesch, 2016; Des Roches, Balachandran, Ascnso, Tripodis, & Kiran, 2015; Grogan-Johnson et al, 2013; Houston & Stredler-Brown, 2012; Light & McNaughton, 2013; Little Bee Speech, 2015; McGlynn-Stewart et al, 2017; Snape & Maiolo, 2013).…”

An App Evaluation System for All Stakeholders: A Pilot Study

“…Due to the wide range of possibilities mobile technology may support, an increased focus on the identification of effective and meaningful apps is warranted. The process of identifying apps requires knowledge on how the user may integrate the system into real-world opportunities (Courduff & Szapkiw, 2015) and the functions of the app (Weng & Taber-Doughty, 2015). The opportunity for users to select which app they prefer, will in turn, increase their motivation to use the selected app (Ciampa, 2017), and enhance the user’s engagement, independence, and self-determination skills (Frielink et al, 2018).…”