Intégrer la technologie aux cadres pédagogiques pour soutenir tous les apprenants dans des classes inclusives
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.18357/otessaj.2022.2.2.31Mots-clés :
inclusion, La technologie, UDL, RTI, virtuel, dépistage, évaluation, interventionRésumé
En Ontario, alors que le nombre d'élèves nécessitant un soutien à l'éducation spéciale continue d'augmenter, la transition vers des salles de classe inclusives est devenue plus difficile pour les enseignants en raison du temps limité et du manque de ressources et de soutien dans les salles de classe. Cependant, cette étude a exploré comment huit enseignants du primaire ont surmonté ces obstacles dans leurs transitions réussies vers l'inclusion grâce à l'intégration de la technologie, de la conception universelle de l'apprentissage (UDL) et des cadres de réponse à l'intervention (RTI) dans les salles de classe en ligne et physiques. Grâce à des entretiens en ligne et à des observations en classe, les enseignants ont partagé et démontré oralement comment la technologie pouvait accroître l'engagement des élèves, différencier l'enseignement, fournir aux élèves des méthodes alternatives d'enseignement et d'évaluation et renforcer les capacités des enseignants dans les salles de classe. Malgré cette intégration réussie de la technologie et des cadres pédagogiques, des inefficacités ont été révélées dans les approches de sélection et l'accès des enseignants à des ressources d'évaluation rationalisées pour identifier les besoins des élèves. Une discussion a examiné les obstacles auxquels se heurtent les enseignants pour répondre aux besoins de tous les apprenants avec des considérations technologiques proposées qui peuvent aider d'autres enseignants dans leur transition vers des classes inclusives.
Références
Alahmari, A. (2019). A review and synthesis of the response to intervention (RTI) literature teachers’ implementations and perceptions. International Journal of Special Education. Vol. 33, No.4, 2019.
Basham, M.I, Graden, J, Poth, R. & Winston, M. (2010). A comprehensive approach to RTI: embedding universal design for learning and technology. Learning Disability Quarterly. Volume 33, Fall 2010. https://doi.org/10.1177/073194871003300403 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/073194871003300403
Bjekic, D., Obradovic, S., Vucetic, M. & Bojovic, M. (2014). E-teacher in inclusive e-education for students with specific learning disabilities. Science Direct. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 128 (2014) 128 –133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.131
Brackenreed, D. (2011). Inclusive education: Identifying teachers’ strategies for coping with perceived stressors in inclusive classrooms. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, Issue #122, June 23, 2011.
Canadian Research Center on Inclusive Education. (2021). Understanding inclusive education. Western University. https://www.inclusiveeducationresearch.ca/about/inclusion.html
CAST (2018). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org
Cowan, C., & Maxwell, G. (2015). Educators' perceptions of response to intervention implementation and impact on student learning. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 16.
Coy, K., Marino, M., & Serianni, B. (2014). Using universal design for learning in synchronous online instruction. Journal of Special Education Technology. Volume 29, No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341402900105 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341402900105
Desire to Learn (D2L) (n.d.). Brightspace core. https://www.d2l.com/k-12/products/core/
Dolighan, T. & Owen, M. (2021). Teacher efficacy for online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic. Brock Education Journal. 2021 Vol. 30. https://doi.org/10.26522/brocked.v30i1.851 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26522/brocked.v30i1.851
Froese-Germain, B., Riel, R. & McGahey, B. (2012). Class size and student diversity: Two sides of the same coin. Canadian Teacher Federation. January 12, 2012.
Goodrow, M. A. (2016). A study of teachers' challenges with the inclusion of middle and high school students with autism. Walden University Scholars Works, pg. 65-66. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=3760&context=dissertations
Greenwood, C.R., Carta, J.C, Kelley, E.S., Guerrero, G., Kong, N. Atwater, J., & Goldstein, H. (2016). Systematic replication of the effects of a supplementary, technology-assisted, storybook intervention for preschool children with weak vocabulary and comprehension skills. The Elementary School Journal Volume 116, Number 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/686223
Hall, T., Vue, G., Strangman, N., & Meyer, A. (2004). Differentiated instruction and implications for UDL implementation. National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. http://aem.cast.org/about/publications/2003/ncac-differentiated-instruction-udl.html
Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., and Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. 3rd Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Nabiullina, R.K. (2015). The principle of humanism- The fundamental principle of inclusive education. Review of European Studies; Vol. 7, No. 4; 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/res.v7n4p73
National Center for Learning Disabilities (NCLD). (n.d). Progress monitoring within a response to intervention model. http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/research/progress-monitoring-within-a-rti-model
National Center on Response to Intervention. (2010). Essential components of RTI. American Institutes for Research. https://rti4success.org/essential-components-rti
Nepo, K. (2016). The use of technology to improve education. Child Youth Care Forum. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-016-9386-6
Ok, M.W., & Rao, K. (2019). Digital tools for the inclusive classroom: Google Chrome as assistive and instructional technology. Journal of Special Education Technology, Vol. 34(3) 204-211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643419841546
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2005). Education for all. Expert Panel on Literacy and Numeracy Instruction for Students With Special Education Needs. http://www.oafccd.com/documents/educationforall.pdf
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2013). Learning for all: A guide to effective assessment and instruction for all students, Kindergarten to Grade 12. Queen’s Printer for Ontario. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/general/elemsec/speced/LearningforAll2013.pdf
Ontario Teacher’s Federation. (2016). The meaningful collaborative assessment and feedback strategies. https://www.otffeo.on.ca/en/learning/tlc/report/the-meaningful-collaborative-assessment-and-feedback-strategies
Parekh, G. (2013). A case for inclusion. Toronto District School Board. Toronto, Ontario.
People for Education (2019). Annual report on schools. What makes a school? https://peopleforeducation.ca/report/2019-annual-report-on-schools-what-makes-a-school/#chapter5
Preston, A.I., Wood, C.L. & Stecker, P.M. (2016). Response to intervention: Where it came from and where it's going, Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth. 60:3, 173-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2015.1065399 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2015.1065399
Rogers, C. R. (1995). Way of being. Houghton Mifflin.
Sharpe, S. (2019). Examining Google Classroom capabilities to help to provide principles of universal design for learning. https://research.library.mun.ca/13935/1/thesis.pdf
Smith Canter, L., King, L., Williams, J., Metcalf, D., & Myrick Potts, K. (2017). Evaluating pedagogy and practice of universal design for learning in public schools. Exceptionality Education International. Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.5206/eei.v27i1.7743 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5206/eei.v27i1.7743
Spencer, S. (2011). Universal design for learning: Assistance for teachers in today’s inclusive classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Teaching and Learning, Volume 1, Number 1.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). Differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. ASCD.
Yin, R. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage Publications. 2018. 6th Edition.
Téléchargements
Publié-e
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
(c) Tous droits réservés Diane Montgomery 2022
Cette œuvre est sous licence Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.
Authors contributing to the OTESSA Journal agree to release their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. This licence allows this work to be copied, distributed, remixed, transformed, and built upon for any purpose provided that appropriate attribution is given, a link is provided to the license, and changes made were indicated.
Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the OTESSA Journal right of first publication.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the OTESSA Journal.
