Human enhancement continues to be hotly debated by both 'professionals' and academics, and increasingly also by the general public. This is no surprise, given that the idea of making human beings better - individually and collectively - has existed for centuries. Parents appear to be especially receptive to new ways of improving the qualities of their offspring - first and foremost their cognitive abilities - in the hope of giving them the best life possible. At the same time, children as not-yet autonomous persons are vulnerable to the decisions made on their behalf. This dynamic has led to a long-running philosophical debate about the moral permissibility of paediatric enhancement. Unfortunately, this debate has somewhat stalled at the point of disagreement on general permissibility, with both sides strongly relying on the notion of well-being to support their respective positions. Rapid progress in the sciences, including the development of the new CRISPR-Cas9 technique, holds much promise for effective cognitive enhancement in children, and this makes proper ethical assessment an urgent matter. Arguing that enhancement is here to stay and that prohibition is not a feasible option in a globalised world, I suggest that the debate should instead focus on what cognitive enhancement in children is likely to mean for the welfare of children. Addressing the question of whether enhancement of intellectual abilities in children is likely to lead to the creation of 'superhuman' disabled children - that is, children with superior or even yet-unseen cognitive capacities but a disability in some other sense (medical, social or both) - I draw on evidence from various fields, including education, law, disability studies and sociology, to demonstrate that the positive effect of cognitive ability on individual well-being is frequently overestimated and can thus not serve as a moral justification for cognitive enhancement. Furthermore, the current legal environment with regard to children with higher intellectual abilities gives cause for concern about the well-being of future cognitively enhanced children and urges us to address prevailing shortcomings in educational provision before deliberately engaging in the creation of more cognitive potential. Suggesting that any moral judgment about cognitive enhancement should focus strongly on the ends pursued, I argue that the welfare of children is endangered not so much by the new possibilities and methods of enhancement as by the failure to fully appreciate children's need for the provision of appropriate opportunities to match their individual abilities.

<p>Co-teaching is a practice in which “two professionals co-plan, co-instruct and co-assess a diverse group of students. Both teachers provide substantive instruction to all students on a daily, consistent basis. Neither is considered the main teacher of the class; they are equals” (Murawski, 2008, p. 29). Unfortunately, co-teaching in practice is often characterized by one teacher handling most of the instruction and the other operating in an assistant role (Murawski & Lochner, 2009, 2010; Volonio & Zigmund, 2007). Co-teaching should also be characterized by the use of multiple models that facilitate small group instruction, which should increase student to teacher interaction and student engagement (Friend, 2014). </p><p>A way to address these gaps is to provide co-teachers with ongoing coaching support (CEC, 2012). The goal of this study was to increase the quality of co-teaching through different levels of coaching to facilitate small group instruction through parallel teaching and increase student engagement. This study used a MTSS model with a multi-probe design to respond to the level of support co-teachers need, starting with peer coaching, then traditional coaching, and finally bug in ear (BIE) coaching. </p><p>There were three sets of co-teaching pairs who participated. There was an intervention effect for all three pairs of teachers with peer coaching, the first tier of the intervention. Therefore, the other two levels of support were not needed as all participants met criteria in peer coaching. Additionally, there was an effect in increasing student engagement with peer coaching. These procedures can be used and adapted for future research in coaching co-teachers to improve their practices. </p>

Sensory processing disorder (SPD)is a neurological disorder that effects how sensory stimuli is translated in the brain and then incorrectly circulated into responses. It is estimated that one in twenty people may have been diagnosed with SPD. Children diagnosed with SPD have responses to stimuli that are over-responsive or under-responsive and find it challenging to correctly process sensory input compared to their peers. <div>This IRB approved study focused on investigating the benefits of brain breaks for middle school students with SPD. Sixteen middle school teachers in one school participated in a needs assessment survey regarding their knowledge of sensory processing disorder and brain breaks and how they implemented brain breaks into their classroom.Questions were based on prior knowledge of sensory processing and brain breaks. Regarding the level of prior knowledge about sensory processing disorder, 6.25% of participating middle school teachers reported that they are very familiar with SPD, 50% of teachers reported they are somewhat familiar with SPD, 12.5% of teachers reported they are not so familiar with SPD, and 31.25% of teachers reported that they are not at all familiar with SPD. Teachers were also asked how effective they thought brain breaks are on student learning and its impact on behavior in the classroom with teachers responding that, “students seem more engaged after we do a brain break in class,” or, “I feel that they are effective because it gives students the opportunity to energize and restart.”<br></div><div>A handbook was created to help teachers understand what SPD is and how to recognize it in their classroom. Guidelines are included in the handbook for ways to use brain breaks in the classroom to help with sensory seeking students needing movement.<br></div><div><br></div>

<p>Restricted and repetitive behavior (RRB) is a core feature of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Research suggests that the severity of RRB may be influenced by both environmental variables (e.g., absence of sensory stimulation input) and neurophysiological activity within the body (e.g., atypical regulatory capacity of the autonomic nervous system). Substantial research efforts have been devoted to the assessment of factors that influence the occurrence of RRB in individuals with ASD, which have led to the development of assessment methodologies, such as functional analysis, to identify specific contexts in which RRB occurs, and measures of heart rate variability (HRV) to index the level of neurophysiological activity for individuals with ASD.</p><p>However, despite the increasing consensus that the assessment and treatment of RRB require a more comprehensive approach due to the complexity and heterogeneity of the neurodevelopmental disorder, there exists a paucity in research that addresses both the functional behavioral and neurophysiological dimensions of RRB. This study aimed to address this gap by (a) designing and evaluating the effects of an integrated function-based assessment on identification of the functional subtypes of RRB and (b) examining the relationship between RRB and HRV as an indicator of neurophysiological functioning. The study included six participants, ages four to seven, with ASD. A single-case alternating treatments design, with two conditions simulating low- and high-stimulation environments, was used for the assessment of functional subtypes within each participant. Dependent variables included the duration of RRB and HRV. RRB was measured using MOOSES, a multi-option observation system for experimental studies. HRV was measured using wearable technology that collects blood volume pulse. Visual analysis of time series data as well as nonparametric analyses of the dependent variables were conducted to determine the functional subtypes of RRB and the association between HRV and RRB across participants.</p><p>Study results suggest that (a) the integrated assessment is effective in identifying specific functional subtypes of RRB and (b) HRV is positively correlated with the rate of RRB. The findings of this study offer new insights on the understanding of how underlying environmental and neurophysiological mechanisms may influence the occurrence of RRB in ASD. Furthermore, the study provides an integrated assessment model that can be feasibly implemented in applied settings.</p>

<p>Students who have disabilities often face many difficulties throughout their lives and are not always given the same opportunities to learn important daily living skills as their peers. Most research in this area does not account for the need to teach daily living skills to students with mild disabilities, and instead is focused on teaching these skills to students with severe disabilities. In this study, the methods for teaching daily living skills are examined and skills that should be taught to middle school students with mild disabilities are discovered. Key findings from this study indicate that there are many daily living skills that are not being taught to students with mild disabilities, teachers do not often have the time to teach these skills, and there is a lack of resources for teaching daily living skills to middle school students with mild disabilities. The handbook created from this study aims to fill part of the gap by sharing suitable methods for teaching daily living skills and providing a checklist of daily living skills to teach to the students.</p>

<p>A majority of special education students—64%—spend 80% or more of their time in regular education classes. The primary method of delivering special education services is by creating co-taught classes. Despite its popularity, literature suggests that most co-teaching relationships never meet their full potential due to a number of factors. The purpose of this study was to explore the nature of co-teaching in one high school. This included an exploration into teachers’ employed strategies, their perceptions, and the challenges related to their co-taught classes. Twenty-nine teachers from an urban, public high school, in a city in the Midwest participated in the one-time anonymous survey. Results from this study suggest that most teachers rely on “One Teach, One Drift” (also known as “One Teach, One Assist” and “One Teach, One Support”) as their primary mode of implementing co-teaching in their classes. Additionally, the results from this study suggest that most teachers believe that co-teaching is an effective way to provide special education services to students with special education needs. However, 59% of teachers reported that they have not received expectations of their role and their collaborators role (65%) in co-taught classes. Participants cited lack of common planning time as the most prominent challenge that hinders successful co-teaching (70%), and lack of content knowledge (56%). Additionally, perspectives and attitudes of collaborators and lack of access to adequate resources/training presented a challenge. </p>

<p>The rising prevalence of developmental disabilities has created an increased demand for service providers capable of delivering behavior-analytic services with high fidelity. As the need for these services continues to grow, ensuring that service providers have easy access to the essential training for delivering high-quality services becomes paramount. This dissertation aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and acceptability of asynchronous training methods in developing service providers' skills to effectively implement trial-based functional analysis (TBFA).</p> <p><br></p> <p>In Study 1, four board-certified behavior analysts (BCBA) were trained using an asynchronous model, which included remote behavior skills training and self-monitoring. Three BCBAs achieved mastery criteria for all TBFA conditions, while one BCBA required additional support through self-monitoring to meet the criteria for the escape condition. While the BCBAs showed improved accuracy in implementing TBFA, they faced challenges in fully generalizing their skills to actual clients, indicating the need for planned support to enhance skill generalization. In Study 2, four BCBA trainees were trained using the same asynchronous model, but with increased mastery criteria and planned supports available during the generalization phase. The findings showed that all BCBA trainees met the mastery criteria when using TBFA with video-annotated feedback, and the inclusion of planned supports during the generalization phase resulted in consistent implementation with 100% fidelity across all TBFA conditions, highlighting the importance of such supports for skill generalization.</p> <p><br></p> <p>Overall, the dissertation suggests that asynchronous training methods hold promise for training service providers, but the availability of planned supports is essential for effective skill generalization. The study's major findings and implications for practice are discussed, along with directions for future research.</p> <p><br></p>

<p>  </p> <p><strong>Abstract</strong></p> <p><br></p> <p>Students with mild disabilities are often taught in an integrated class setting where they are provided additional support and accommodations while remaining in general education classes with their non-disabled peers. These students often have high-incidence disabilities (e.g. learning disabilities, emotional disabilities, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and some other health impairments), and have a unique set of characteristics that create challenges for academic and social growth (Stelitano et al., 2019; Trainor et al., 2016). Recent research has shown that exposure to social emotional learning and the 16 Habits of Mind has been beneficial for students with mild disabilities, however teachers are struggling to implement these ideologies in addition to their traditional responsibilities (Jones et al., 2017; Dyson et al., 2019; Cueso & Harrison, 2012). The 16 Habits of Mind are a set of 16 problem-solving, life-related skills that promote personal growth and success (Costa & Kallick, 2000). </p> <p><br></p> <p>The present study was conducted as a requirement of a master’s degree in special education. There are two sub projects: administrating an anonymous survey through Qualtrics and developing an instruction manual. The purpose of the study was to determine teachers’ understanding and experience of social emotional learning and the 16 Habits of Mind and to identify obstacles that prevent teachers from implementing such practices in their classrooms. Twenty-eight licensed teachers recruited from a Title I, public, high school answered the 13 survey questions. The analysis of the results addressed three research questions, (1) What understanding and experience do teachers have about social emotional learning for high school students with mild disabilities?, (2) What understanding and experience do teachers have about using the 16 Habits of Mind with high school students with mild disabilities?, and (3) What kinds of supports (e.g. administrative, district-level, building-level, online resources) are in place to help teachers implement social emotional learning for students with mild disabilities? </p> <p><br></p> <p>Results from the study show that teachers occasionally implemented social emotional learning, and they are confident in their ability to do so, but there were factors that limited regular implementation. Teachers were concerned with the time requirement of social emotional learning, and the support available within their building when navigating sensitive subjects. Many participating teachers had heard of Costa and Kallick’s (2000) 16 Habits of Mind and teach many of the concepts informally through daily practices and routines. A majority of teachers reported teaching three habits formally and often within their classrooms: Striving for Accuracy (50%; N=24), Questioning and Posing Problems (60.87%; N=23), and Applying Past Knowledge to New Situations (54.17%; N=24). When asked to identify which habits were most influential to student success, 20% (N=19) of teachers identified persistence as most important. Teachers’ testimonies showed that using the 16 Habits of Mind as a tool to drive social emotional learning could be beneficial, but, they expressed concerns about being able to blend concepts with existing curriculum without neglecting instruction time.</p> <p><br></p> <p>Using the survey results, a handbook was created to support teachers in implementing the 16 Habits of Mind, as a tool for social emotional learning, into their classroom. The handbook contains the following sections: Students with Mild Disabilities, Social Emotional Learning, The Habits of Mind, Implementation Suggestions, and a detailed outline for each habit. For each of the 16 habits the outline included the following items: Objectives, Relevant Vocabulary, Definition, Application to Learning, Quote, Daily Practices, 1-3 Mini-Lesson Plans, and Journal/Discussion Questions. The hope is that the handbook will provide a resource for teachers, so they feel more comfortable integrating the 16 Habits of Mind into daily curriculum without compromising instruction time. For teachers that would like to go above and beyond, the mini-lesson plans provide activities that can deepen student understanding of the habit and only require 5-15 minutes of class time. In order to develop a handbook that would be most effective for teacher use, it was reviewed by university faculty and licensed special education teachers. After review minor adjustments were made for teacher use and benefit.  </p>

<p dir="ltr">Previous wok has established that multiple academic and cognitive skills can contribute to difficulty with mathematics (Bull & Lee, 2014; Morgan et al., 2019; Purpura Day et al., 2017; Schmitt et al., 2017). However, little is known about how using both domain-specific (i.e., numeracy) and domain-general skills (i.e., executive function (EF), language, vocabulary) can help to identify children at risk for mathematics difficulties. Given that an estimated 3% to 8% of children are diagnosed with a math related disability (Desoete et al., 2004) and even more children experience difficulties with mathematics, and that mathematics is an important predictor of academic and career success (Duncan et al., 2007; Watts, 2020) it is imperative to understand how both domain-specific and domain-general skills, along with key demographic factors, can be used to identify children at risk for future mathematics difficulties. <a href="" target="_blank">The current study utilized data from a longitudinal project that assessed children’s academic and cognitive skills over four time points: the fall and spring of preschool and kindergarten</a> in a state in the Midwest of the United States.The analytic sample for this study consisted of 674 children from three cohorts. <a href="" target="_blank">A person-centered latent profile analysis was used to generate profiles of early math learners using children’s early numeracy, math language, executive function (EF), literacy, and vocabulary skills. Based on the model fit statistics and interpretability, a six-profile solution emerged from the data.</a> The latent profile approach was compared to a variable-centered regression for identifying risk for mathematics difficulties. <a href="" target="_blank">Results</a> show that there is variability in performance profiles in a sample at the lower end of mathematics performance. This study <a href="" target="_blank">suggests that domain-general skills such as EF, literacy, and mathematical language skills can help to distinguish between different performance profiles of mathematics learners</a>. <a href="" target="_blank">Results also demonstrate that person-centered and variable-centered approaches should be used in conjunction with one-another to best identify children at risk for mathematics difficulties.</a></p>

<p>This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness of instructional technology on mathematical word problem solving for elementary and middle school students with disabilities. This study examined specifically digital technology such as computers and tablets. From the article identification based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 21 studies were included in this study. The 21 included studies consisted of seven group design studies and 14 single-case design studies. This study computed an overall effect and analyzed moderators of group design studies (Hedges’ <em>g</em>) and single-case design studies (between-case standardized mean difference) in the same analyses. The overall effect of instructional technology on word problem solving across 21 studies was large (Hedges’ <em>g</em> = 1.18, 95% CI = 0.84, 1.52). The study characteristics, including publication years, intervention settings, intervention agents, technology devices, technology types, and mathematics topics, were found to moderate the effects of interventions. The four studies, which assessed the generalization of word problem solving skills learned from the instructional technology to the standardized assessments, showed a near moderate effect (Hedges’ <em>g</em> = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.09, 0.9). Limitations of this study and directions for research are discussed.  </p>