Instructional Practices in Enhancing Sight Vocabulary Acquisition of ESL Students with Autism

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 ( 2013 ) 266 – 270

1877-0428 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.Selection and peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Ferhan Odabaşıdoi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.09.187

ScienceDirect

3rd World Conference on Learning, Teaching and Educational Leadership (WCLTA-2012)

Instructional practices in enhancing sight vocabulary acquisition of ESL students with autism

Saroya Yahya *, Melor Md Yunus, Hasnah Toran Faculty of Education,The National University of Malaysia, Bangi 43600,Malaysia

Abstract

Teaching sight vocabulary to students with autism is a challenge as these students have different needs from their nondisabled peers. This study explored teachers’ instructional practices in teaching sight vocabulary to ESL students with autism in the natural classroom setting. Data collection included field notes on classroom observation and interviews of teachers. The findings of this study suggested that teachers provided support through bridging second language instructions with the students’ L1 (Malay) to ease learning. Findings also indicated that teachers adjusted their level of vocabulary during instruction to promote sight vocabulary acquisition. Further, results suggested that giving the students frequent opportunities for using words as their nondisabled peers promotes sight vocabulary acquisition. © 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and peer review under the responsibility of Prof. Dr. Ferhan Odabaşı

Keywords: Second language teaching, sight vocabulary, instructional practices, autism;

1. Introduction

Autism is a neurological disorder marked by social, communication and language deficits (Tager Flusberg, 2004). These deficits particularly impair the cognitive ability to make sense of the world. ESL students with autism have challenges with learning language due to the impairments. In addition, ESL students are those who come from homes in which English is not the dominant language. This poses an additional barrier to these students as they have less opportunity to speak and read in the target language. This results in limited sight vocabulary. Not only do these students enter school knowing limited number of sight words than their typically developing peers; students with autism have been shown to have difficulty in following classroom discussions (O’Connor & Klein, 2005) and making inferences from text (Martin & McDonald, 2004). To promote literacy, teachers should differentiate instruction for these students to ease learning.

1.1. The learning characteristics of students with autism

Researchers have found that children with autism are generally unable to use language to communicate due to cognitive difficulties. Those with low cognitive functioning may be nonverbal or have limited speech. Some

* Saroya Yahya. Tel.: +0-000-000-0000 E-mail address: [email protected]

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

© 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.Selection and peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Ferhan Odabaşı

267 Saroya Yahya et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 93 ( 2013 ) 266 – 270

children with high cognitive functioning may have a wide range of vocabulary. However, they may not be able to use their knowledge of words in articulating speech. Children with cognitive and developmental disorder such as autism need explicit and systematic language instruction in order to learn language (Lerner, 2003). Instructional practices that have been found to be promising are the ones that are highly structured (Arick, Loos, Falco & Krug, 2004). Besides having difficulties using their knowledge of words, children with autism have been found to have difficulty processing auditory stimuli. Having auditory information processing disorder may contribute to difficulty in understanding verbal commands. Too much verbal commands for instance, can be confusing to a child with autism. Therefore, it is suggested that verbal instruction be kept short to help them digest information (Scheuermann & Webber 2002).

1.1.2 The importance of sight vocabulary to students with autism

Sight vocabulary or sight words are words that are recognized at an instant (Ehri, 2005). There are a number of reasons why sight vocabulary should be emphasized at the primary level. A growing body of research suggests that sight word is beneficial in supporting different aspects of reading skills, including word recognition, phonological awareness, fluency, and reading comprehension (Riviera, Koorland & Fueyo 2002; Joshi 2006; Parette, Blum, Boeckmann & Watts 2009).

Sight vocabulary is an important component skill in reading especially to students with disabilities. Browder & Xin (1998) stated that through sight word or sight vocabulary, students with disabilities could learn functional academics such as reading a list of grocery items or identifying the time or venue in a train schedule. These are the skills that they need in order to function well in society.

2. MMethodology

The study was conducted in three primary schools in Malaysia. This was a qualitative research that used case study design. The study explored teachers’ instructional practices that enhanced sight vocabulary for students with autism. The research question of the study was: What do teachers in the mainstream and special education value as effective practices for enhancing sight vocabulary to ESL students with autism? Two mainstream teachers and two special education teachers were selected as participants. The selected teachers worked with students with autism. Data collection included field notes taken by the researcher during a six month period when observing the teachers and students in the classrooms. Interviews of teachers on their instructional practices during the English language lessons and document analysis were completed to provide greater depth to the main data. Data were transcribed and analyzed through constant comparison to build understanding of the subjects. Excerpts of the interview, classroom observation and document were crosschecked by three raters. The numbers of items from each of the rater were gathered and calculated to obtain the Kappa value for each rater. The mean obtained for the present study was 0.95.

3. Findings and discussion

The findings of this study suggested that teachers’ use of L1 (Malay) in bridging second language (L2) instructions is effective in teaching new sight vocabulary and concepts. For example, the second teacher participant explained the benefit of this practice: “I explain and translate the meaning of the words...he can easily understand.” (Interview data: 21.10.2011).This was echoed by the fourth teacher participant. She shared her thoughts regarding how she used L1 in her class to facilitate sight vocabulary acquisition: “Well, he knows lots of words in his mother tongue. I translate the words so that he can understand.” (Interview data: 18.10.2011).

A related practice was described by the third teacher participant. She too, confirmed that the use of L1 helped the lesson to go on smoothly. She reasoned that if the instruction given in the target language (L2) was difficult for the student to understand, she would translate the instruction so that students knew what to do. However, she stated that she seldom use L1 in her class. She would use L1 under certain circumstances as she said:


“only for the words that are difficult...I will use Malay” (Interview data:12.10.2011) The fourth teacher participant believed that teachers should make use of L1 to ease learning. She saw this as one of the strengths of ESL students with autism. Although they have language impairments, ESL students with autism have an advantage of knowing more than one language. Concepts that they could not understand in the second language could be easily explained to them in their mother tongue. Data on classroom observation showed that this practice was common in all the classrooms observed. The teacher participants gave instructions in the target language (English) and then bridged the instruction in L1 to facilitate students’ learning.The second teacher participant shared his belief on the use of L1 in his teaching: “I’m using the translation method ....don’t have to waste much time.”(Interview data:21.10.2011). These participants pointed out the practicality of using L1 to get the words and content of the lesson across. Bridging L2 instruction with L1 was reported by the teacher participants to be a worthwhile effort. With this type of instruction, students with autism could be taught the concept of the words in their L1. Although these students have impairments, they have basic knowledge and concepts of the world around them. Calderon et al (2005) noted that English language learners could learn concepts of words in the target language when these words were translated into their native language. In a study regarding the impact of instruction on vocabulary acquisition, Lugo Neris (2007) found that English instruction supplemented with Spanish enhanced the vocabulary acquisition of young English language learners. These students may feel at ease learning English because they understand the instructions and the language tasks. Findings also indicated that teachers adjusted their level of vocabulary during instruction to promote sight vocabulary acquisition. The fourth teacher participant was observed to use words that students were familiar with when explaining the meaning of the word ‘desk’. She explained to the students that a desk is smaller than a table. Then, she showed them a desk with a drawer and told them that a desk is usually used to work at (Observation data: 17.6.2011). This practice was also used by the first teacher participant. He reported that he used words that students already knew when he explained to them the meaning of a newly taught word so that students could make connections. For instance, the teacher told the students that the word ‘pretty’ is equivalent to the word ‘beautiful.’ (Observation data: 26.5.2011). Primarily, data on classroom observations suggested that students with autism could easily learn new sight words when the teachers adjusted their level of vocabulary during instruction. Teachers’ adjustment of their level of vocabulary is identified as critical in promoting the acquisition of sight vocabulary in students with autism. The teachers highlighted the need to make the students understand the essence of what was said to them. Tuning their language to suit the students’ level during instruction is important to aid students’ comprehension. This practice mirrored what is reflected as effective teaching practices for English learners (Gersten & Baker, 2000).

Further, an unexpected finding of this study was that mainstream teachers were observed to give students with autism frequent opportunities for practice as their nondisabled peers. This was contrary to previous research that investigated teachers’ beliefs and practices on teaching special needs students. The survey conducted on mainstream teachers showed that they were less supportive than their special education counterparts when attending to special needs students (Mohd Najib & Sanisah, 2006). The teachers felt that they were not competent in dealing with these students. In the present study, the second teacher participant pointed out that students with autism needed more practice in order for them to remember words: “ have to do more reading..then vocabulary. Every morning before class I give him a special...a special class, just for reading, the reading starts at 7 o’clock until 7.30 and he comes everyday.” (Interview data:21.10.2011).The teacher suggested that this kind of practice would benefit the student as he got the extra coaching that the teacher could not give during the normal teaching hour. In another mainstream class, the teacher was observed to give the student with autism the opportunity for practice like the rest of the students in the classroom. In one of the observations, he asked the student to write the words learnt for the day on the whiteboard and later called on him to construct sentences using the newly learnt words. Although the student seemed unsure and afraid at the beginning, the constant practice throughout the duration of the school year might have enhanced the retention of the words learnt. The same practice was seen in the special education classrooms. In all four classrooms, students were actively engaged in the language activities throughout the lessons. This practice is in line with that of Gersten, Baker, Haager & Graves (2006) findings in the sense that the teachers in this study


valued frequent opportunities for practice as a way to enhance learning. As the researcher observed, the teachers in the mainstream classes were very supportive. This could be due to the teachers’ past experience in teaching students with autism. Both teachers had taught other students with autism the previous year.

In sum, findings of this study suggest that teachers reported beliefs and practices that are in line with research-based practices of effective vocabulary instruction for typically developing ESL and ELL students. In the case of this study, ESL students with autism benefited from teachers’ alternate use of L1 in instruction and from being actively engaged in the language tasks. Adjusting the level of vocabulary to fit the level of the students was also seen to benefit the students. 4. Implications This exploratory study has several implications. First, this investigation calls for more extensive research on teachers’ practices in teaching students with autism. This would be more meaningful if interviews of school administrators are included to corroborate espoused beliefs and practices. Second, the results indicate the need of guidelines to help teachers in the mainstream and special education to teach sight vocabulary to ESL students with autism. Third, the findings indicate the need for getting teachers who are supportive. This is critical as teachers’ attitude towards special needs students has an impact on the students’ learning. Finally, there should be more emphasis on sight vocabulary instruction in teacher preparation programs at the elementary level for students with autism to help them gain literacy.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank all the teacher participants. Without their collaboration, this study would not have been possible.

RReferences

Arick, J., Loos, L., Falco, R. & Krug. D. (2004). The STAR program: Strategies for teaching based on autism research. USA: Pro-Ed. Browder, D. & Xin, P.Y. (1998). A meta analysis and review of sight word research and its implication for teaching functional reading to

individuals with moderate and severe disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 32, 130-153. Calderon, M., Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., & Slavin, R.E. (2005). Bringing words to life in classrooms with English language learners. In E.H. Heibert

& M.L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and Learning vocabulary: Bringing Research to Practice (pp.115-136). Mahwah, NJ:Earlbaum. Ehri, L. C. (2005). Learning to read words: theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(2), 167-188. Gersten, R.M., & Baker, S. (2000). What we know about effective instructional practices for English language learners. Exceptional Children, 66(4), 454-470. Gersten, Baker, Haager, & Graves. (2005). Exploring the role of teacher quality in predicting reading outcomes for first grade English language learners. Remedial and Special Education, 26(4), 107-206. Joshi, R.M. (2006). Vocabulary: A critical component of comprehension. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 21, 209-219. Lerner, J. (2003). Learning disabilities:theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies. USA: Houghton Mifflin. Lugo Neris, M. J., Jackson, C. W., & Golstein, H. (2010). Facilitating vocabulary acquisition of young English language learners. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 41, 314-327. Martin, I., & McDonald, S. (2004). An exploration of causes of non-literal language problems in individuals with Asperger syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(3), 311-328. Mohd Najib Ghafar & Sanisah Jahaya. (2006). Bias Pengajaran Guru Dalam Pelajaran Khas Dan Pelajaran Normal. (In Malay). Teachers’ Bias in Special Education and Mainstream Setting. A paper presented at the Annual Conference on Teacher Education, 6-8 September 2006, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia. O'Connor, I. M., & Klein, P. D. (2004). Exploration of strategies for facilitating the reading comprehension of high-functioning students with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34, 115-127. Parette,H.P., Blum,C, Boeckmann, N,M., & Watts,E. (2009).Teaching word recognition to young children who are at risk using Microsoft Powerpoint coupled with direct instruction. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36, 393-401.


Riviera, M.O., Koorland, M.A., & Fueyo, V. (2002). Pupil-made pictorial prompts and fading for teaching sight words to a student with learning disabilities. Education & Treatment of Children, 25(2), 197-207.

Scheuermann, B., & Webber, J. (2002). Autism: Teaching does make a difference. USA: Wadsworth Publishing.

Tager-Flusberg, H., (2004). Strategies for Conducting Research on Language in Autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(1), 75-80.

Documents

Instructional Practices in Enhancing Sight Vocabulary Acquisition of ESL Students with Autism