Counseling, Higher Education & Special Education
Permanent URI for this communityhttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/2226
The departments within the College of Education were reorganized and renamed as of July 1, 2011. This department incorporates the former departments of Counseling & Personnel Services; Education Leadership, Higher Education & International Education (excluding Organizational Leadership & Policy Studies); and Special Education.
Browse
4 results
Search Results
Item The Roles of Anger and Self-Regulation on School Readiness in Kindergarten(2020) Callan, Sabrina; Teglasi, Hedwig; Counseling and Personnel Services; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)Young children who are anger-prone or have poor self-regulation skills tend to have difficulties in school (Diaz et al., 2017; Liu et al., 2018; Valiente et al., 2012). However, few studies have explored how anger may work together with different self-regulatory tendencies to predict children’s school readiness. This study examined the relations of anger, effortful control, executive functioning, and school readiness among kindergarteners (n = 72). Executive functioning skills were found to be particularly important for academic readiness, whereas anger and effortful control were found to be particularly important and to work together to predict social-emotional readiness. These findings provide evidence for the conceptual distinctions between executive functioning and effortful control as two distinct types of self-regulation, and demonstrate the need for tailored approaches to social-emotional learning (SEL). Future SEL programs would benefit from approaches that take children’s pre-existing tendencies for anger and self-regulation into account in anger management training.Item State Efforts to Collect Child Outcomes Data for the Part B-619 and Part C Programs Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act(2010) Gupta, Sarika Sarpatwari; Lieber, Joan; McLaughlin, Margaret; Special Education; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)The Part B-619 and Part C Programs under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) provide preschool special education and early intervention services, respectively, to children with disabilities birth through age 5. Recent requirements in IDEA require states to monitor the implementation of these programs through a series of indicators, one of which focuses on the outcomes that infants, toddlers, and preschoolers make as a result of program participation. Known commonly as child outcomes, these data will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the Part B-619 and Part C programs. The purpose of this investigation was to determine how Part B-619 and Part C programs are collecting high-quality child outcomes data, what barriers these programs are facing in this collection, and how programs are addressing these barriers. Telephone interviews were used to gather descriptive information from a national sample of Part B-619 and Part C coordinators. The clarity and scope of the interview was improved through Dillman's (2000) pretest procedures. The final interview consisted of open-ended questions and was standardized to elicit consistent information from each respondent (Patton, 1990). The results of the study showed that state Part B-619 and Part C programs used similar methods to support the accurate and reliable collection of child outcomes data. Most frequently noted methods included training, a statewide measurement approach, and data review. Despite these methods, 18 types of barriers emerged from collection efforts. Barriers primarily pertained to data quality and the transmission of child outcomes data from local programs to the state. States chose to address barriers through the methods used to support high-quality collection efforts, most notably training and the use of communication and collaboration. Findings suggest that states have established a structure to coordinate the collection of child outcomes data statewide. These efforts focused primarily on improving the quality of these data. Barriers related to the quality of the data emerged despite these efforts, which further indicate the need for ongoing support to sustain high-quality collection efforts. These findings emphasize the importance of training and continuous monitoring to ensure the quality of child outcomes data in statewide collection efforts.Item A Qualitative Analysis of the Experiences and Perspectives of Family Child Care Providers Who Care for Young Children with Disabilities(2006-08-10) Wayne, Tracey Simone; Beckman, Paula J.; Special Education; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)Increases in the number of parents in the paid labor force and welfare reform have resulted in more families requiring non-parental child care. Most often this care is provided in environments outside of the child's own home. There is also a trend to promote the inclusion of young children with disabilities in community-based settings. Families of children with disabilities often prefer family child care programs. However, limited research has been conducted on family child care providers who include children with disabilities in their programs. The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences and perspectives of family child care providers who care for young children with disabilities, using the following research questions: (a) What factors encourage family child care providers to accept young children with disabilities? (b) What strategies do family child care providers use to include young children with disabilities? (c) What supports do family child care providers receive while caring for young children with disabilities? (d) What barriers are reported by family child care providers who care for young children with disabilities? A multiple case study design was used. Data collection involved: (a) interviews with licensed family child care providers, parents of children with disabilities and administrators involved in training and licensure; (b) observations of family child care providers; and (c) a review of documents. Case summaries were written for each provider. Then a cross-provider analysis was conducted. All of the providers had some experience or exposure to children with disabilities in the past. They believed that all children were unique and special and demonstrated a positive attitude toward inclusion. Providers engaged in pre-service and in-service disability-related training. Providers and the parents established strong collaborative relationships. Strategies to include the children with disabilities ranged from using specialized equipment to simple modifications. Early childhood special education staff supported the providers in including the children. Other sources of support included membership in associations, as well as smaller informal networks. Barriers reported were related to lack of training opportunities and funding for specialized equipment, the needs of the child with a disability, and factors associated with the business.Item A Concurrent Validation Study of the Maryland Developmental Screen(2005-05-23) McNinch, Abigail; Beckman, Paula J.; Special Education; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)The purpose of this study was to examine the concurrent validity of a new screening instrument, the Maryland Developmental Screen (MDS), with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, Second Edition (BSID-II). The MDS and BSID-II were concurrently administered at the University of Maryland (UMMS) Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) Follow Up Clinic to an age stratified sample of 81 infants and toddlers, born at 36 weeks gestation or younger, and whose corrected ages ranged from 18 days through 37 months of age. The sensitivity and the specificity rates were determined to be 88.2% and 90.1% respectively. The chance hit rate of 66.7% indicates that the overall hit rate of 90.1 was not due to chance alone. A relationship between the false negative and false positive outcomes in relation to the developmental domain of the child was determined. Evidence that the MDS has unique utility in identifying potential atypical development was also demonstrated. This study provides preliminary evidence that the MDS has validity in screening the development of infants and toddlers born prematurely. Further investigation of the instrument's validity using larger and more diverse sample sizes is needed.