Functional Mobility for Disabled Students - Research Paper Example

?Running head: FUNCTIONAL MOBILITY AND DISABLED How Physically Disabled Can Improve With Mobility Skill Training College Affiliation Abstract The study analyzed is the article shed light on the outcome that functional mobility focused skill training can help students with physical disabilities. These skills are taught through different methods of education, including physical therapy and occupational therapy so the young students will perhaps achieve more success through a shift in teaching methods to include mobility opportunities. The study includes an examination of a test group of five children and the effects that Mobility Opportunities Via Education (MOVE) curriculum and how it impacts students' ability to learn despite having severe physical disabilities. How Physically Disabled Students Can Improve With Mobility Skill Training According to Barnes and Whinnery (2002), the study that they conducted and analyzed was based on how the Mobility Opportunities Via Education (MOVE) curriculum impacted young students that had physical disabilities. Five students who were in elementary school were in the study test group to determine how this curriculum would help the them functionally walk despite their severe physical disabilities. Throughout this study, many tests and measures of the students' results were taken to see how if this newly-designed curriculum helped them progress in their learning process. Research Problem The problem addressed in this article discussed the issues of how Mobility Skills Training curriculum would help children progress physically, educationally and cognitively when the method of teaching was re-routed. Teaching young students that have severe disabilities can be difficult as they must overcome hurdles that other children do not. This analysis is imperative to help young students find new ways to grow and become better functioning students and in the future, adults so they will not be completely hindered because of their disability but instead make the most of their existing abilities. The hypothesis of this research is that the new curriculum will help the students progress and improvements will be recorded at the start, intervention and conclusion points of the experiment. Literature Review There are multiple points in the literary analysis by Barnes and Whinnery that can shed light on the background and necessity of the MOVE technique and how it could help students improve. One of the first key points is that all students regardless of their disability, if they are enrolled in a special education program, they are entitled to additional educational programs such as physical and occupational therapies. This is an educational minimum standard throughout the United States. According to research in addressed by this article, therapists in educational environments have training that fulfills the medical side of a students' needs that add to the already in place educational goal (Craig, Haggart & Hull, 1999; Dunn, 1989; Rainforth & York-Barr, 1997). Secondly, another main point behind this research is that therapists usually try to correct the students rather than advocate that their behaviors are actually a norm for them, therefore, trying to build a different quality of life where a child may feel less successful when compared to a mainstream 'normal' student (Campbell, McInerney, &Cooper, 1984; Fetters, 1991). Lastly, a major key point is that these basic therapeutic programs do not necessarily help to increase the development of their functionality in a normal setting, but instead are just taught to perform at a minimal functionality due to their disability. Their standards are typically lower because of their physical disability (Rainforth & York-Barr, 1997). Method Research Format This experiment is primarily qualitative because there is a complete, detailed aim rather than a measure to test statistics. The outcome was subjective because it interprets the events through observation rather than seek measurements and analysis. The MOVE curriculum itself has both qualitative and quantitative measures because it also incorporates testing into the students' education. It also takes a long period of time to conduct observation of the test group rather than a short and to the point quantitative study. This is a quasi-experiment because there is little control over some of the treatments or factors that are being studied. There also is a lack of random assignment because the five children that were selected to complete the study were selected because they each had severe physical disabilities. The design of this experiment is a single-subject multiple-baseline study across five different children between the ages of three and nine with severe physical disabilities and how skill training affected their ability to perform and progress. Five children were studied over a course of time that were from public elementary schools located in an urban school district in the southeastern part of the United States. Four of the participants were in a preschool setting while the only other participant was in a classroom for students with disabilities. Eligibility was determined based on severity of disability of the student, parental consent, medical eligibility, willingness for the school to accept the MOVE criteria methods for teaching and no other exposure to MOVE curriculum. Most participants had limited mobility either requiring a wheelchair or someone to carry them. According to Barnes and Whinnery (2002) , disabilities included Down's Syndrome, seizure disorder, mental retardation, cerebral palsy, blindness, spastic quadriplegic palsy and often a combinations of several of these. The five students were tested on the MOVE curriculums six steps: testing, setting goals, task analysis, measuring prompts, reducing prompts and teaching the skills and their outcome. These steps were in time intervals of no more than 10 seconds. Data was collected over the course of one school year in a regular school setting. The professionals actually conducting the MOVE curriculum to the students included two special education teachers, a physical therapist and an occupational therapist who had been specifically trained in MOVE curriculum methods. At the baseline period, they students were monitored according to the number of repeated steps within those 10 second time intervals and were measured until a steady measurement could be determined so that they could use it as their actual current walking functioning. Data Collection A special time twice a week was set aside to measure the improvement of walking skills throughout the year of the implementation of the MOVE curriculum. The measurements were taken toward the earlier part of the day, during the first walking opportunity during an activity. Three different levels were set aside to assess the students' walking ability and progression. They were able to walk independently without assistance, have some adult assistance, or need to use a full gait trainer to fully help them walk. As the students progressed in their walking ability, the less they relied on another person to help them walk. Their overall progression was identified based on their independence of walking versus their dependence on another. To measure the steps, one specific person consistently measured the students' stride while a second person then did a second measurement to assure a certain level of reliability. They also went through the multiple steps of the MOVE method to gather and measure data. Data Analysis The team of researchers upon collecting data, then created graphs to show the reciprocal steps at the baseline period, the MOVE implementation period and the maintenance period to visually explain how each student progressed. Upon the teaching of the MOVE curriculum, the students were analyzed individually, comparing their reciprocal steps at the beginning of the study and how they had improved, or if they had improved after its implementation. Students were not compared to one another. They were simply measured upon what their abilities were and what they had become. The only reason that they were ever compared is to see if all students had progressed and what factors may have contributed to seeing no progress in a student. Findings Findings showed that some students did gradually improve while others showed hardly any improvement at all. Some may not have improved because their disability did not allow for them to have great noticeable improvements. However, some students may have reached their peak and now be at their plateau already before the study occurred so it appeared that there was no improvement in all when in fact, they already were functioning to the best of their capabilities. Limitations The authors address their limitations of this study acknowledging that it was limited because there were five people in the test group. They also had a variability of data and had a difficulty in establishing a true cause and effect relationship. Additionally, interpretation can vary because of the individual student and their already present disability and how they would behave in their environment and if they were feeling good or bad that day. If they were having a bad day where they did not feel good, they would naturally perform at a lower standard. Different disabilities could impact how effective MOVE is on each child and the relationship is at this point indeterminable for sure as to how the curriculum changes their individual outcomes. The outcomes cannot necessarily be generalized toward a larger population. The curriculum may have an influence and it could be possibly be a significant one on each student. However, since each child is so different, it's hard to determine if the outcome could truly be transferred to others. More than likely, there would be improvement in some people as a result of this curriculum. However, some students, like the ones that were included in this analysis, may have already plateaued and are at the best state of performance they will ever be physically. Since each child is different, there could always be an exception. It is possible that this same method could be utilized in patients that have suffered strokes or a condition or illness in which their physical ability weakened and it could help to monitor their progress. Implications For Practice From my own personal experiences, I have worked both as a fifth grade elementary educator and now I teach at an alternative high school for boys. While I was a fifth grade teacher, I did not encounter many issues in regards to physical disabilities fortunately. Working in the alternative high school is a whole different story. Many of these boys have had rough pasts and have parents that do not support them or are in jail and a few of them have been incarcerated themselves. One student has cerebral palsy and he has additional obstacles to overcome due to the physical disabilities rather than just his emotional behavior and home life issues. It is so sad to see these young men work through daily struggles just to exist. However, I know that my own personal interest and the way I interact with them will hopefully inspire them as I'm one of the only positive role models some of these boys have. It can be difficult some days and others, quite rewarding. It is amazing to see breakthroughs with each individual student. I work extensively trying to develop them emotional management skills for these boys with behavior issues. My one student with cerebral palsy would be an excellent candidate to implement the MOVE curriculum techniques. He has a hard time being able to stand for anything longer than a short period of time. He tries to bear his own weight while holding a stationary object for support and often walks with help of an adult. He has undergone physical therapy to help increase the strength in his legs and arms. However, unfortunately, every day is still a battle. He really is a very intelligent student and it is evident that he is willing to learn. However, his confidence has been minimized due to the disability he has. Usually, the other boys are helpful and understanding and try to help therefore making it easier to help him but again, they have their own issues. This helps him get along well in the group but he is still frustrated at times. For this student, I can see where the MOVE implementation, teaching more functional mobility skills training, for him would impact him both physically and increase his self-confidence. This way he could strengthen his movements and hopefully progress, therefore improving his attitude and his school work. It inspires me to want to look more into this curriculum and perhaps become trained to administer the curriculum so that down the road, more kids like this one will be able to strengthen themselves. For this student, I do not think he is at his plateau point. I really do think that working with him to improve his gait would improve his balance and allow him to not be so reliant on chairs, desks, and other stationary objects. This past summer, I worked as a counselor at a camp for children ages 9-15 with various handicaps. I was selected due to my experience with working with special education and alternative education students. Some students are paraplegics so the likelihood of them having much improvement, unfortunately, is quite slim. However, when looking at most of their special education needs, there are several that have issues with formulating sentences due to not being able to speak clearly or are deaf. Even though the MOVE curriculum does not recognize these impairments, it does make me want to look more closely at being able to help those kids through similar method with measurements of progress, recordings, and other techniques to monitor functionality rather than development. Many of these students though, truly did have physical disabilities of all kinds and even multiple disabilities at one time. I can see that the MOVE curriculum, though it would be a limited exposure time during a summer camp, would help children and teenagers alike to progress. Teenagers, however, are more difficult as they have learned to cope with their disability and may have a hard time trying to rework their motor skills to function any better than they already do. References Barnes, S.B. , Whinnery, K.W. (2002). Effects of functional mobility skills training for young students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 88 (313-324). The Council for Exceptional Children. Campbell, P.H., McInerney, W.F. & Cooper, M.A. (1984). Therapeutic programming for students with severe handicaps. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 38 (9), 594-602. Craig, S.E., Haggart, A.G., & Hull, K.M. (1999). Integrating therapies into the educational setting: Strategies for supporting children with severe disabilities. Physical Disabilities: Education and Related Services, 17(2), 91-109. Dunn, W. (1989). Integrated related services for preschoolers with neurological impairments: Issues and strategies. Remedial and Special Education, 10(3), 31-39. Fetters, L. (1991). Cerebral palsy: Contemporary treatment concepts. In J.M. Lister (Ed.), Contemporary management of motor control problems: Proceedings of the II Step Conference (pp.219-224). Alexandria, VA: The Foundation for Physical Therapy. Rainforth, B., & York-Barr, J. (1997). Collaborative teams for students with severe disabilities: Integrating therapy and educational services. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes. Read More