effective classroom management practices for classroom...
Post on 06-Mar-2018
298 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
EFFECTIVE CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR CLASSROOM
TEACHERS OF STUDENTS WHO ARE DEAF AND HARD OF HEARING
Institute of Education Sciences
CFDA 84.324A Special Education Research Grant
TOPIC: Professional Development for Teachers and Related Service Providers
GOAL 1: Exploration
8/22/2016 – 5/11/2018
University of Arizona
Jennifer Catalano
Submitted to Dr. C. June Maker, professor of Special Education,
on behalf of the faculty of the College of Education in partial fulfillment of the degree
requirements for the doctorate in Special Education
Fall 2015
CATALANO 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT……………………………………………….. 2
PROJECT NARRATIVE…………………………………………………………….. 4
1. Significance…………………………………………………………………….. 4
2. Research Plan…………………………………………………………………… 7
3. Personnel……………………………………………………………………….. 13
4. Resources……………………………………………………………………….. 15
APPENDIX A………………………………………………………………………….. 18
APPENDIX B………………………………………………………………………….. 19
1. Figure B.1 Quality of Classroom Learning Environment (Q-CLE) Rating
Scale..……………………………………………………………………………
20
2. Figure B.2 Roles and Responsibilities of Personnel……………………………. 33
APPENDIX C………………………………………………………………………….. 34
APPENDIX D………………………………………………………………………….. 35
1. Letter of Agreement from Michael N. Griffith…………………………………. 36
2. Letter of Agreement from Mark Borgstrom……………………………………. 37
3. Letter of Agreement from Amy Lederberg…………………………………….. 38
APPENDIX E………………………………………………………………………….. 39
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES CITED…………………………………… 40
RESEARCH ON HUMAN SUBJECTS NARRATIVE…………………………….. 43
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES OF SENIOR/KEY PERSONNEL……………….. 44
1. Jennifer Catalano, Principal Investigator………………………………….......... 45
2. Shirin Antia, Co-Principal Investigator ……………………………….……….. 49
CURRENT AND PENDING SUPPORT OF SENIOR/KEY PERSONNEL……… 53
1. Jennifer Catalano, Principal Investigator………………………………….......... 54
2. Shirin Antia, Co-Principal Investigator ……………………………….……….. 55
NARRATIVE BUDGET JUSTIFICATION………………………………………… 56
CATALANO 3
PROJECT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT
Title: EFFECTIVE CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR CLASSROOM
TEACHERS OF STUDENTS WHO ARE DEAF AND HARD OF HEARING
Topic: Professional Development for Teachers and Related Services
Goal 1: Exploration
PI: Jennifer Catalano, M.A.
Purpose: The ultimate purpose of this project is to increase student academic engagement by
identifying effective classroom management practices (i.e., strategies and methods) used by
kindergarten through second grade teachers of students who are deaf and hard of hearing (DHH)
in self-contained classrooms. This study will (1) measure the effectiveness of classroom
management practices through the use of a classroom learning environment rating scale and (2)
determine the academic engagement of elementary students who are DHH in self-contained
classrooms. Through this exploration, the research team will identify, quantify, and evaluate
malleable factors that contribute to effective classroom management practices. The findings of
this research will be used to develop professional development of effective classroom
management practices for teachers of DHH students.
Setting: Existing video recordings of language arts instruction from a larger study implemented
by the Center on Literacy and Deafness (CLAD) during the 2013-14 (Year 1) and 2014-15 (Year
2) school years will be used for observation. Video recordings from the spring of each school
year occurred in K-2 self-contained DHH classrooms in several locations including four states
during Year 1 and six states and one Canadian province during Year 2.
Sample: Video recordings of approximately 66 self-contained classrooms including
approximately 67 teachers and approximately 207 DHH students will be observed and analyzed.
The language of instruction of the classrooms was 41% American Sign Language (ASL), 35%
spoken language, and 24% total communication (TC), a hybrid of spoken language and signing.
The selection of students was skewed toward deaf students with greater than a 90 decibel hearing
loss attending self-contained classrooms because this is the portion of the population of DHH
students that has the greatest need for literacy instruction support.
Research Design and Methods: Classroom management practices will be coded using the
Quality of Classroom Environment (Q-CLE) rating scale. Student academic engagement will be
determined using Time sampling observation recording. To investigate the relationships between
classroom management practices and student engagement, a correlational research design will be
applied.
Key Measures: Using Interact©, a video observation software package, the effectiveness of
classroom management practices will be rated using a six point scale across five general
descriptive categories, including (1) instructional clarity, (2) instructional delivery, (3) classroom
orientation, organization, and planning, (4) behavior management and control/discipline, and (5)
warmth and responsiveness. Student academic engagement will be measured in terms of degree
of engagement, including (1) active engagement, (2) passive engagement, (3) non-engagement,
and (4) disruptive behaviors.
Data Analytic Strategy: Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize the main features of
the data collection. Multiple regression analyses will be used to determine the degree of
relatedness between classroom management practices (independent variables) and student
academic engagement (dependent variable) in self-contained K-2 classrooms for DHH students.
CATALANO 4
PROJECT NARRATIVE
SIGNIFICANCE
Purpose The ultimate purpose of this study is to increase student academic engagement by
identifying effective classroom management practices (i.e., strategies and methods) used by
kindergarten through second grade teachers of students who are deaf and hard of hearing (DHH)
in self-contained classrooms. The immediate purpose of this study is to (1) measure the
effectiveness of classroom management practices through the use of a classroom environment
rating scale and (2) determine the academic engagement of kindergarten through second grade
(K-2) students who are DHH in self-contained classrooms. The researchers will use the findings
of this study to provide in-service teachers with classroom management professional
development specifically geared toward promoting active engagement and student participation
of DHH students.
The following research question will guide this study: What are the relationships between
classroom management practices and student academic engagement in self-contained, K-2
classrooms for DHH students? To explore this relationship, the research team will identify,
describe, quantify, and evaluate malleable factors that contribute to effective classroom
management practices for the purpose of maintaining student academic engagement in language
arts instruction and improving reading, writing, and language skills of DHH students.
While research exists in the area of problem behaviors among DHH children (Barker,
Quittner, Fink, Eisenberg, Tobey, Nirparko, & the CDaCI Investigative Team, 2009; Davis, et
al., 1986; Gann, Gaines, Antia, Umbreit, and Liaupsin, 2015; Stevenson, McCann, Watkin,
Worsfold, & Kennedy, 2010; Theunissen et al., 2013), there is minimal research available
relating to effective classroom management practices in classrooms specific to DHH classrooms.
The analysis of existing video recorded observations of self-contained K-2 classrooms for DHH
students will result in an exploration and determination of the relationship between malleable
factors and student education outcomes specific to DHH classrooms. Classroom management
practices may be different in DHH classrooms than in general education classrooms due to the
differences in teacher preparation and communication needs (e.g., need for visual attention). This
study will explore classroom management practices specific to DHH classrooms.
Description of Malleable Factors
Classroom management is an essential skill for all teachers. Effective classroom
management and universal classroom practices (Trussell, 2008) have been directly linked to
decreased disruptive behaviors, increased student academic engagement, and improved academic
achievement (McGarity & Butts, 1984; Oliver & Reschly, 2010; Piwowar, Thiel, & Ophardt,
2013; Reinke, Lewis-Palmer, & Merrell, 2008; Simonsen, Fairbanks, Briesch, Myers, & Sugai,
2008). Day, Connor, and McClelland (2015) found that the reduction of unproductive time (e.g.,
off-task time, waiting, disruptions) will likely help improve first grade students’ behavioral
regulation and literacy skills. This was especially true for first grade students that demonstrated
weaker behavioral regulation at the beginning of the school year. The malleable factors that
contribute to improved educational outcomes for students are teacher classroom management
practices and student academic engagement.
According to Simonsen et al. (2008), classroom management practices can be grouped
into five general categories including (a) physical arrangement of classroom (i.e., classroom set-
CATALANO 5
up), (b) structure of classroom environment (e.g., teacher directed activity, routines), (c)
instructional management (e.g., questioning, wait time, reactions to students’ responses), (d)
procedures designed to increase appropriate behavior, and (e) procedures designed to decrease
inappropriate behavior. Student or academic engagement is a multi-dimensional construct
(Fredericks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004) that exists in the absence of disruptive, off-task, and
inattentive behaviors (Finn, Pannozzo, & Voelkl, 1995) and in the presence of classroom
enabling behaviors (Greenwood, Horton, & Utley, 2002). Higher engagement rates achieved
through effective classroom management practices have been identified as a significant correlate
of student achievement (Brophy, 1988; Cameron, Connor, and Morrison, 2005; Connor, Son,
Hindman, & Morrison, 2005; Connor et al., 2014; Day, Connor, McClelland, 2015). For DHH
students in general education classrooms, participation is related to academic achievement
(Antia, Sabers, & Stinson, 2007).
Rationale
Results from standardized testing have demonstrated significant gaps in academic
achievement when comparing DHH students with their typically hearing peers (Davis, Elfenbein,
Schum, & Bentler, 1986; Meinzen-Derr et al., 2014; Qi & Mitchell, 2011). Fifty percent of a
national sample of high-school aged DHH students demonstrated performance below proficiency
level in the areas of reading comprehension and math problem-solving (Traxler, 2000).
Several relatively large-scale correlational studies involving DHH children have
indicated relationships between low-language ability and increased behavior problems (Barker et
al., 2009; Davis et al., 1986; Stevenson et al., 2010; Theunissen et al., 2013). Disruptive or
inappropriate behaviors are associated with lower levels of attention and engagement that
interfere with learning (Finn et al., 1995). Therefore, when DHH students are less engaged, the
likelihood of problem behaviors increases and academic achievement is increasingly impeded.
Additionally, the “Regional and National Summary Report of Data from the 2009-10 Annual
Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth” (2011) shows that approximately 40%
of DHH students in the United States have additional disabilities including, but not limited to,
developmental delay, learning disabilities, Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, traumatic
brain injury, emotional disturbances, and autism, which may further affect a student’s academic
engagement and achievement.
A survey by Wesley and Vocke (1992, cited in Emmer & Stough, 1996) indicates that
only 37% of students in teacher education preparation programs take a course in classroom
management. Oliver and Reschly (2010) reviewed the course syllabi of 26 special education
teacher preparation programs in one state and found that only 27% of the programs had an entire
course dedicated to classroom management. Fewer numbers of pre-service teachers enrolled in
DHH education teacher preparation programs (6%) take a classroom management course as
demonstrated by the investigation of plans of study for Master’s level DHH education students at
an elite university in the southwestern United States (K. H. Kreimeyer, personal communication,
January 27, 2014). Despite these significant findings, no studies focusing on the classroom
management practices of self-contained classroom teachers of DHH students have been
identified.
Exploratory investigations of self-contained classrooms for DHH students through
classroom observation will provide insight into the relationship between classroom management
practices and academic engagement for DHH students. This insight will guide the researchers
toward the development of pre-service education and in-service professional development of
effective classroom management practices for teachers of DHH students.
CATALANO 6
Aims
Teacher classroom management practices and student academic engagement are
malleable factors that can be identified, analyzed, and transformed through exploration of
teaching practices in self-contained classrooms for DHH students. The findings of this
exploratory research will lead to the development of classroom management professional
development for in-service teachers of DHH students and the integration of classroom
management instruction into teacher preparation programs for pre-service teachers of DHH
students at both the undergraduate and Master’s levels. Short-term outcomes for teachers of
DHH students will be the independent use of effective classroom management practices.
Intermediate outcomes will be increased instructional effectiveness. Professional development
will ultimately impact the number of effective classroom managers teaching DHH students in
self-contained classrooms. Consequently, students will demonstrate increased time on task
during language arts instruction allowing for improved reading, writing, and language skills
(Brophy, 1988; Cameron, Connor, and Morrison, 2005; Connor, Son, Hindman, & Morrison,
2005; Connor et al., 2014; Day, Connor, McClelland, 2015). The long-term effects of teachers
acquiring effective classroom management skills will be an increase in the number of DHH
students functioning on grade level in the areas of reading, writing, and language development.
Practical importance
A significant amount of research has been conducted on evidenced-based classroom
management practices in general education settings (Emmer & Stough, 2001; Simonsen et al.,
2008). However, little to no research exists in the area of classroom management practices for
teachers working with DHH students, specifically in self-contained classrooms. Due to delays in
the areas of reading, writing, and language development, language arts instruction has been the
main focus for researchers in the improvement of education for DHH students over the last
several decades. An exploration of classroom management practices in classrooms with DHH
students during language arts instruction, supported by evidence-based practices used in general
education classrooms (Brophy, 1988; Cameron, Connor, and Morrison, 2005; Simonsen et al.,
2008), will provide the researchers with critical information about the effectiveness of practical
strategies and methods that can be immediately disseminated to teachers of DHH students for
implementation.
Future work
The results of this study will inform researchers of the development and application of
future research in the area of effective classroom management practices with teachers of DHH
students in self-contained classrooms. Future research will include single subject and group
experimental research of interventions supporting effective classroom management practices in
the areas of (a) physical arrangement of classroom, (b) structure of classroom environment, (c)
instructional management, (d) procedures designed to increase appropriate behavior, and (e)
procedures designed to decrease inappropriate behavior (Simonsen et al., 2008).
CATALANO 7
RESEARCH PLAN
Research Question
The following research question will guide this study: What are the relationships between
classroom management practices and student academic engagement in self-contained, K-2
classrooms for DHH students?
Research Design The research team will utilize a correlational research design to investigate the
relationships between classroom management practices and student academic engagement in
self-contained, K-2 classrooms for DHH students. Malleable factors that contribute to improved
educational outcomes for students include teachers’ classroom management practices and student
academic engagement. Classroom management practices will be coded using the Quality of the
Classroom Learning Environment (Q-CLE) rating scale developed by the Center on Literacy and
Deafness (CLAD), referred to as the CLAD Q-CLE. Student academic engagement will be
measured using a Time sampling observation recording system. Existing video recorded sessions
of language arts instruction from the CLAD research project will be observed as the primary
source of data collection.
First, the researchers will pilot the observation coding systems to develop a ‘gold
standard’ for preparing additional coders. Next, the research team will use the observation
coding systems to code the video recordings and enter the results into a database system. Finally,
data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and multiple regression analyses by determining
the relationships between classroom management variables and student engagement as well as
the interactions between the variables.
Sample
The existing data set of recorded videos being used for this study is from the CLAD
research project. The classroom observations were recorded during the fall, winter, and spring of
the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school years. Simultaneous video recordings of the teacher and the
students were made for each taping. The videos have been edited and formatted to show the view
of the teacher and the students at the same time on a split screen.
Classrooms were identified as self-contained DHH only (67.6%), inclusion settings
(15%), and resource settings (14%). For the purposes of this study, only the spring recordings of
language arts instruction in self-contained classrooms will be used. Spring video recordings of
language arts instruction took place in several locations including four states during Year One
(i.e., Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, and Missouri) and six states and one Canadian province during
Year Two (i.e., Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, New York, South Carolina, and Vancouver,
B.C.). The CLAD research project represents the largest study of DHH students to date in terms
of sample size and geographical locations.
For this project, video recordings of approximately 66 self-contained classrooms
including approximately 67 teachers and approximately 207 DHH students will be used for data
collection. Based on the demographic data from the larger study by CLAD, the language of
instruction of the classrooms was 41% American Sign Language (ASL), 35% spoken language,
and 24% total communication (TC), a hybrid of spoken language and signing.
Demographics. The following teacher and student demographic information represents
the entire sample of teachers and students involved in the CLAD research project during the
2012-13 and 2013-14 school years. Videos of classrooms were organized by communication
mode (i.e., signing, spoken language, and TC) rather than educational setting (e.g., self-
CATALANO 8
contained, inclusion, itinerant). For the purposes of this study, only self-contained classrooms
will be observed and analyzed. Therefore, the first step in this project will be to reorganize the
videos of classrooms into two categories (i.e., self-contained and other). At that point, teacher
and student demographic information specific to self-contained classrooms will be generated.
Teachers. Teacher demographic information will be obtained from the CLAD central
office at Georgia State University as soon as it is released.
Students. Data were collected for 311 students with Better Ear Pure Tone Averages
greater than 45 dB loss. There are 123 kindergarteners, 104 first graders, and 84 second graders.
The students were diverse along several dimensions. The preferred communication modes or
languages for the students are 41% sign only, 35% spoken language only, and 24% both sign and
spoken language. Speech perception assessments revealed that 56% have consistent spoken word
identification and 40% have no speech perception. Thirty-nine percent of the students have a
cochlear implant. Twenty-seven percent have at least one deaf parent. Race demographics
include 53% white, 15.5% African-American, 7% Asian, 3% Native American or Alaskan
Native, and 15% other. Ethnically, 34% are Hispanic. Fifty-three percent of the students included
in the sample are female. The selection of students for the sample was skewed toward deaf
students with greater than a 90 dB hearing loss attending self-contained classrooms because this
is the portion of the base population of DHH students that has the greatest need for literacy
instruction support.
Measures
Classroom management practices and student academic engagement are the key variables
to be measured in this study.
Classroom management practices. The CLAD Q-CLE rating scale, developed by
members of the CLAD research team, will be used to code classroom management practices (see
Appendix B). The Q-CLE includes six general categories and uses a six point Likert scale
ranging from least effective (rating one) to most effective (rating six). Categories on the teacher
rating scale include (1) instructional clarity, (2) instructional delivery, (3) classroom orientation,
organization, and planning, (4) behavior management and control/discipline, (5) warmth and
responsiveness and (6) student participation/active engagement. Only the first five categories
will be included in the observation of classroom management practices. Student participation and
active engagement will be observed using a Time sampling observation recording system.
Definitions. Instructional delivery is the process in which teachers apply a variety
of instructional strategies to teach, communicate, and interact with students around academic
content, and to support student engagement. Effective instructional delivery is purposeful and
focused on student outcomes. Instructional clarity is the ability of the teacher to provide
instruction and directions that help students come to a clear understanding of the content.
Instructional clarity is evident when students are able to follow instructions independently.
Classroom orientation, organization, and planning are the systems, strategies, and methods that
a teacher implements to manage the daily operation of the classroom or learning environment.
Classroom orientation, organization, and planning are effective when the classroom is well
organized and advanced planning and routines are evident. Behavior management and
control/discipline are the systems, strategies, and methods that teachers use to manage the
behaviors of their students. A consistent and effective behavior management plan contributes to a
high quality classroom learning environment. Warmth and responsiveness is measured as the
learning environment that teachers create in which students are comfortable taking risks,
participating in classroom activities, and approaching the teacher. A teacher that is warm and
CATALANO 9
responsive generates a learning environment that is consistently positive with students
functioning as active members of the learning community. Finally, student participation and
active engagement is the observable behavior a student demonstrates that shows productive
membership in the classroom. An effective classroom learning environment will likely result in
students showing sustained and active involvement during instruction.
Validity. The CLAD Q-CLE was adapted from the Quality of Classroom Learning
Environment rating scale developed by Dr. Carol Connor and her research team at the Institute
for the Science of Teaching and Learning at Arizona State University. Literature in the area of
classroom teacher behavior and organization guided the development of the rating scale (Brophy,
1988; Cameron, Connor, and Morrison, 2005). Specific observable indicators within each
category were developed based on findings from related research. Procedures for ensuring
validity of the CLAD Q-CLE were conducted during the development of the rating scale. To
ensure that the CLAD Q-CLE was, in fact, measuring observable classroom management
behaviors, two CLAD research team members piloted the rating scale by observing 10% of the
videos of self-contained classrooms prior to implementation of the rating scale.
Instructional delivery. Teacher practices within this category that enhance student
achievement include appropriate pacing of instruction, responding to students in ways that
maximize their learning, and increased time spent in academic activities (Connor et al., 2005;
Kern & Clemens, 2007). According to Brophy (1988), use of appropriate wait time, systematic
methods for delivering content, proper frequency and level of question asking, and specific
feedback and responses toward students are essential characteristics of effective instructional
delivery that affect student achievement. Furthermore, individualized instruction that
accommodates for individual differences among students in the classroom is generally more
effective than global instruction to all students (Connor et al., 2009).
Instructional clarity. Instructional clarity influences students’ on-task behavior and
amount of involvement in academic activities (Cameron, Connor, & Morrison, 2005). Students
learn more when the language of instruction is clear and specific (Brophy, 1988) and when
objectives and expectations are overtly stated (Kern & Clemens, 2007). Visual access to speakers
and materials with limited visual and auditory distractions may lead to increased focus on
academic tasks (Guardino & Antia, 2012). Furthermore, teachers who provide consistent and
extensive feedback to students elicit higher achievement gain than those who give minimal or no
feedback to students (Brophy, 1988).
Classroom orientation, organization, and planning. Classroom orientation, organization,
and planning are effective when the classroom is well organized including the set-up of the room
(Guardino & Antia, 2012), advanced planning, and the use of a structured, predictable schedule
and routines (Connor et al., 2014; Kern & Clemens, 2007). Teachers who implement effective
management systems to organize instruction have higher levels of student success (Cameron,
Connor, & Morrison, 2005). Preparation of the physical environment, execution of specific rules
and procedures for transitions, and advanced organization of instructional materials contribute to
appropriate classroom behaviors (Connor, Spencer, Day, Giuliani, Ingebrand, McLean, &
Morrison, 2014; Kern & Clemens, 2007), student achievement (Brophy, 1988), and literacy
outcomes (Day, Connor, & McClelland, 2015).
Behavior management and control/discipline. In a classroom with evidence of an
effective behavior management system, the teacher is clearly in charge and is taking proactive
measures to ensure students are ready to learn. Disruptions from within and outside of the
classroom are handled quickly and efficiently. Discipline is consistently proactive, positive, and
CATALANO 10
corrective and includes the use of behavior specific praise (Reinke, Lewis-Palmer, & Merrell,
2008). Teachers who use a continuum of strategies to respond to inappropriate behaviors will be
more effective in decreasing disruptive behaviors and more capable of allowing for increased on-
task, productive engagement in academic tasks (Day, Connor, & McClelland, 2015; Simonsen et
al., 2008).
Warmth and responsiveness. Warmth and responsiveness embodies the overall emotional
climate of a classroom (Connor et al., 2014). Specifically, warmth and responsiveness involves
the way a teacher delivers instruction, not the content of instruction (i.e., how the teacher says
things, not what is said). Connor et al. (2005) found that first grade students who had teachers
that were more ‘warm and responsive’ achieved greater gains in reading skills.
Reliability. During the first two months of the study the PI and the research collaborators
will develop a ‘gold-standard’ for reliability of coding of classroom management variables by
viewing a random selection of language arts instruction from the pre-existing video recordings of
classrooms. One classroom for each communication mode (i.e., signing, spoken language, and
TC) will be randomly selected for a total of three classrooms. For each classroom, the five
general categories of the Q-CLE will be rated and coded on Interact©. IOA will be determined
by dividing the number of agreements by the total number of observed intervals and then
multiplying the results by 100. The goal of IOA will be 80% or better (Umbreit et al., 2007). For
the remainder of the project, 20% of the recordings will be coded by two members of the
research team for IOA according to the same standards. The co-Principal Investigator will act as
a mediator when agreements cannot be reached between the coders.
Student academic engagement. Time sampling observation recording will be used to
measure student academic engagement. Student academic engagement will be categorized as
either productive on-task behavior (active or passive), unengaged, or disruptive behavior
(Guardino & Antia, 2012).
Definitions. Active engagement is defined as any physical behavior demonstrated by the
student that shows productive membership in the classroom (e.g., raising his/her hand, answering
a question, following teacher directions). Passive engagement is behavior by the student that
shows productive membership in the classroom without active participation (e.g., listening and
watching the teacher during instruction). Disruptive behaviors are any behaviors that interrupt
instruction including speaking or signing without permission, getting out of seat without
permission and that causes distraction, making unwanted physical contact with adults, peers, or
materials without permission, not following directions, and making loud noises. Unengaged
behavior is defined as neither active engagement, passive engagement, nor disruptive behavior.
Validity. Time sampling observation recording is a simple and useful method for
measuring behavior during an observation period that is divided into blocks of time or intervals
(Umbreit et al., 2007). Guardino and Antia (2012) utilized time sampling recording to examine
the effect of modifying the physical environment of classrooms on academic engagement and
disruptive behavior of DHH students in self-contained classrooms. The researchers found that
modifications to the classroom increased academic engagement while decreasing disruptive
behaviors. A similar observation system will be used in the proposed research.
Reliability. During the first two months of the study the PI and the research collaborators
will develop a ‘gold-standard’ for reliability of coding for student engagement by viewing a
random selection of language arts instruction from the pre-existing video recordings of
classrooms. One classroom for each communication mode (i.e., signing, spoken language, and
TC) will be randomly selected for a total of three classrooms. IOA will be determined by
CATALANO 11
dividing the number of agreements by the total number of observed intervals and then
multiplying the results by 100. The goal of IOA will be 80% or better (Umbreit et al., 2007). For
the remainder of the project, 20% of the recordings will be coded by two members of the
research team for IOA according to the same standards. The co-Principal Investigator will act as
a mediator when agreements cannot be reached between the coders.
Primary Data Collection. Observational coding systems will be used to code and
analyze classroom management practices and student academic engagement from existing video
recordings of K-2 self-contained classrooms for DHH students using Interact©, a behavioral
research software package, during language arts instruction. The videos have been edited and
compiled into ‘sets’ that only include instruction thereby eliminating instances of non-instruction
and down-time (e.g., getting ready for lunch). A CLAD Q-CLE score and a student academic
engagement score will be determined for each 30-minute segment. Each set will be viewed two
times by each observer.
During the first viewing, a rating of one to six (least effective to most effective) will be
given for each category including (1) instructional clarity, (2) instructional delivery, (3)
classroom orientation, organization, and planning, (4) management plan and discipline, and (5)
warmth and responsiveness.
During the second viewing, time sampling interval recording will be used to code degree
of student academic engagement for each 30-minute segment. The researchers will observe
academic engagement by rotating from student to student, noting the degree of engagement that
was observed at the end of the interval (i.e., active engagement, passive engagement, unengaged,
or disruptive behavior). The duration of each interval will be 10 seconds. During the subsequent
10 seconds, the researcher will record the degree of engagement. The scores for student
engagement will be averaged across students for each 30-minute segment.
Data analysis
Multiple regressions and descriptive statistics will be used to analyze the scores and to
determine the relationships between classroom management variables and student academic
engagement as well as the interactions between the variables. Multiple regression will allow the
researchers to learn more about the relationship between several independent or predictor
variables and a dependent or criterion variable. Specifically, multiple regressions will be run to
predict the outcome of student engagement (dependent variable) as a function of the CLAD Q-
CLE rating variables (independent variables). Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize
and describe the data (e.g., means, standard deviations).
Missing Data. Video recordings from the spring from the CLAD research project that are
missing (e.g., teacher withdrew from study) or inadequate (e.g., poor video quality) will not be
included in this study.
Moderator Analysis. The researchers will investigate if teacher expertise (i.e., years
teaching) is a factor (moderator) that affects the strength of the relationship between
effectiveness of classroom management practices and degree of student academic engagement.
Experienced teachers have been found to be more effective classroom managers than novice and
pre-service teachers as demonstrated by their ability to effectively organize and run classroom
activities and routines, as well as their flexibility in responding to new events occurring in their
classrooms (Emmer & Stough, 2001). By examining teacher demographics, the researchers will
determine if number of years teaching moderates effective use of classroom management
practices.
Timeline
CATALANO 12
The tentative timeline, activities, and responsible person(s) are as follows:
Table 1: Grant timeline, activities, and responsible personnel
Year Month(s) to
complete
Activity Responsible
Personnel
One
August Organize and prepare videos
Set-up Interact© program for
coding of video recordings
Jennifer Catalano
Christina Rivera
August – September Pilot and refine observation
coding system to create a ‘gold
standard’ for coding reliability
Jennifer Catalano
Christina Rivera
Carol Buuck
September Hire research assistants Jennifer Catalano
Shirin Antia
October Teach research assistants how
to code using Interact© and the
observation coding system
Jennifer Catalano
Christina Rivera
Carol Buuck
October – February Use observation coding systems
to code all videos
Check for IOA using 20% of
videos
Enter codes into database
system
Jennifer Catalano
GAs
March – May Analyze data using descriptive
statistics and multiple
regressions
Jennifer Catalano
Shirin Antia
Statistician
May – June Prepare descriptive and
correlational results for
professional development
workshops, conference
presentations, and publications
Jennifer Catalano
Shirin Antia
Christina Rivera
GAs
Two
July – August Create professional
development workshops and
web-based modules for teachers
of DHH students
Prepare conference
presentations
Jennifer Catalano
Christina Rivera
Media Specialist
September – May Ongoing professional
development, consultation, and
support for teachers of DHH
students
Conference presentations
Develop manuscripts for
publication
Jennifer Catalano
Christina Rivera
CATALANO 13
PERSONNEL
Senior/Key Personnel
Jennifer Catalano, M.A., Principal Investigator and Project Director (.75 FTE-AY/1.0
FTE-one summer month), is a Doctoral student at the University of Arizona in the department of
Disability and Psychoeducational Studies (DPS). She is a 2014 recipient of a Personnel
Preparation Fellowship in Special Education. For over two years, she has worked as a research
assistant for the federally funded research project The Center on Literacy and Deafness (CLAD).
Mrs. Catalano has a Bachelor’s degree in Elementary Education from the State University of
New York College at Cortland and a Master’s degree in Deaf Education from the University of
Arizona. She has 14 years of experience as a teacher of students who are Deaf and Hard of
Hearing (DHH), students in special education classrooms and resource settings, and struggling
readers in general education classrooms. Mrs. Catalano will oversee all aspects of the project
including budget oversight, completing reports, research design, recruitment, coding, data
analysis, and coordinating with senior/key personnel, graduate research associates (GRAs), and
CLAD leadership. Upon completion of the study, Mrs. Catalano will conduct professional
development workshops at school sites for DHH students that include ongoing consultation and
support for teachers, develop a web-based classroom management module for teachers across the
country, present at conferences in the field of Deaf Education, and compose manuscripts for
publication in journals
Shirin Antia, Ph.D., Co-Principal Investigator (.10 FTE-AY), is the Meyerson
Distinguished Professor in the Department of Disability and Psychoeducational Studies in the
College of Education at the University of Arizona. She is a co-principal investigator for CLAD.
Throughout her 35 years in the field, Dr. Antia has been PI on numerous large-scale funded
projects, including two research grants funded by the Office of Special Education Programs.
Prior to the establishment of CLAD, she completed a major longitudinal study on academic
outcomes of DHH students. She is a Senior Research Fellow for the federally-funded National
Leadership Consortium in Sensory Disabilities and an associate editor for the Journal of Deaf
Education and Deaf Studies, the premier international research journal in deafness. At the
University of Arizona, she directs the teacher preparation program in education of DHH
children, a federally-funded grant program. Dr. Antia has published extensively in the areas of
social skill development and literacy of children who are DHH in various refereed professional
journals including the Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education and Exceptional Children.
Dr. Antia will assist with recruitment, research design, and data analyses, as well as
communicate with CLAD leadership. She will also act as a mediator for interrater observer
agreement disputes and conflicts between team members. Upon completion of the study, she will
assist in the dissemination of the results via professional development workshops, presentations,
and publications.
M. Christina Rivera, Ph.D., Research Collaborator (.15 FTE-AY/1.0 FTE-one summer
month), is an Adjunct Associate Professor at the University of Arizona and has assisted in the
federally funded research project CLAD for three and half years as a research assistant and
coder. Dr. Rivera has a Bachelor’s degree in Elementary Education from Arizona State
University and a Master’s degree in Special Education/Deaf Education from the University of
Arizona. She has over 20 years of experience in Deaf education, in a variety of placement
options for DHH students. She was a 2011 recipient of the National Leadership Consortium in
Sensory Disabilities fellowship. Her research focus is in the area of effective vocabulary
CATALANO 14
instruction and behavior management through coaching with itinerant teachers of DHH students.
Dr. Rivera will assist in the establishment of reliability for the observational coding systems and
instruction of coding procedures to the GRAs. In addition, she will serve as a consultant
throughout the course of the project. Upon completion of the study, Dr. Rivera will assist in the
dissemination of the results via professional development workshops, presentations, and
publications.
Carol Buuck, M.A., Research Collaborator (.05 FTE-AY), is the Research Coordinator
for CLAD at the University of Arizona. In addition to organizing and managing the research
activities of CLAD, her responsibilities include working as a research teacher in the development
and implementation of a syntax and vocabulary intervention and as a coder. Ms. Buuck has a
Bachelor’s degree in Education of the Deaf from the University of Tennessee and a Master’s
degree in Counseling from the University of Arizona. She worked as a teacher and case manager
of DHH students for over 30 years. Ms. Buuck will assist in the establishment of reliability for
the observational coding systems and instruction of coding procedures to the GRAs.
Other Project Personnel Graduate Research Associates (.50 FTE-AY/.50 FTE-1 summer month) will be
recruited by the PI and co-PI. During the academic year, both GRAs will work 20 hours per
week on the project in addition to 20 hours per week for one month in the summer. During year
one, the two GRAs will assist with coding and interrater observer agreement. During the summer
month, the GRAs will assist in the preparation of descriptive and correlational results for
professional development workshops, presentations, and publications. The GRAs must have a
Master’s in Deaf Education or related field as well as experience teaching DHH students and/or
knowledge of language and literacy development in young DHH children. Proficiency in
American Sign Language and spoken and written English is a requirement for the positions.
For a summary of the roles and responsibilities of personnel for this project see Figure
B.2 in Appendix B.
Management Structure and Procedures
The PI will be responsible for the overall management of this research project.
Senior/Key personnel (i.e., PI, co-PI, and research collaborators) will meet on a weekly basis
during University of Arizona (UA) CLAD meetings to discuss the progress of the project and to
work toward resolving any problematic circumstances. Mrs. Catalano, the PI, will meet with the
GRAs on a weekly basis to discuss coding. All meetings will be held in person whenever
possible. Team members will meet via video conferencing only when absolutely necessary. Dr.
Antia, co-PI, will update CLAD leadership during weekly phone meetings. Additionally, Dr.
Antia will act as a mediator for resolving disputes related to interrater reliability disagreements.
CLAD leadership from Georgia State University will act as an advisory committee to the
research team to provide consultation and conflict resolution as needed.
All members of the research team will have access to the grant file in Dropbox, a web-
based file hosting service. Dropbox will be used to store schedules, coding materials, and other
grant related resources. Identifying information for the participants will be stored on the
protected UA server. Video recordings of classrooms will be accessed from portable hard drives
that will be stored in cabinets under lock and key. The PI will be the primary manager of the
Dropbox file, project data stored on the server, and coding equipment and materials.
CATALANO 15
RESOURCES
Resources to Conduct the Project
Resources from the University of Arizona (UA) will be utilized to successfully
implement this project. UA is a Tier 1 research university with the necessary resources and
facilities needed for successful completion of the project. The National Science Foundation ranks
UA 19th in research and development expenditures among public universities and colleges, and
30th among public and private universities and colleges.
Institutional Resources. This project will be conducted in the Department of Disability
and Psychoeducational Studies (DPS) at the College of Education (COE) in the Education North
Building on the north side of the UA campus. UA will provide fiscal resources in personnel,
equipment, and budget control. The team members will have access to computers, general
software, and UA WiFi network and server.
The COE will provide space, office resources, and technology assistance from two full-
time IT support analysts to complete the project. The COE houses the Department of
Instructional and Learning Technologies with a full-time media specialist that specializes in the
development of high quality videos for the purposes of web-based modules and workshops.
Refer to Appendix D for the letter of agreement from the Department of Instructional and
Learning Technologies.
The Department of DPS offers undergraduate, Master’s, educational specialist, and
doctoral degrees in special education, rehabilitation counseling, school psychology, and school
counseling. The Department of DPS has approximately 59 full and part-time faculty members, all
of whom hold doctoral degrees. In 2014, the DPS faculty received $4,095,390 in external
funding, which is the highest amount of external funds earned by any department in the College
of Education. Faculty members from the Deaf Education and Positive Behavior Supports
programs will be available to provide expert consultation throughout the course of the project.
The Department of DPS will provide the assistance needed for purchasing equipment/materials,
travel, and conference call arrangements.
The University Information Technology Services (UITS) at the University of Arizona is a
campus wide resource that includes the Office of Student Computing Resources, IT support
services, and Research Computing. UITS has a 24/7 help desk that is available to help faculty
and students with administrative support, network assistance, and general computing support
including hardware and software installation and troubleshooting. The Research Computing team
facilitates all campus research by providing hardware and software resources. Specifically, a
statistical consultant from the Research Computing group will provide support for the
completion of data analytic procedures. Refer to Appendix D for the letter of agreement from the
Research Computing group.
The University Office of Sponsored Projects and the College of Education Business
Office will provide assistance with fiscal management of the project by monitoring expenditures
and providing the PI with monthly budget reports.
Center on Literacy and Deafness Resources. Existing video recordings of language arts
instruction in self-contained K-2 classrooms for DHH students from the spring of the 2012-13
and 2013-14 school years will be acquired from CLAD leadership housed at Georgia State
University. Refer to Appendix D for the letter of agreement from CLAD.
Project Funded Resources
CATALANO 16
Additional resources and research team members’ salaries will be funded through the
grant award. During the first year of the project, resources funded by the grant award will include
1. Interact© professional software for behavioral research (Mangold International)
2. SPSS Statistics software (IBM)
3. Notebook computers
4. Extra monitors and connective hardware
5. Dongles (flash drives that enable Interact© to operate)
6. Hard drives
During the second year of the project, resources funded by the grant award will include
mileage reimbursement to and from the Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and Blind in Tucson
and the Phoenix Day School for the Deaf in Phoenix for purposes of dissemination of the results
via professional development workshops.
Resources to Disseminate Results
Findings of this research will benefit self-contained classroom teachers of DHH students
and supervisors of programs for DHH students by identifying potentially important associations
between classroom management practices and student academic engagement. During the second
year of the project, the grant award will be used to develop and disseminate results. Prior
accomplishments of senior/key personnel on the research team and association with CLAD will
increase the team’s capacity to disseminate the results of this project. Mrs. Catalano has provided
professional development to teachers of DHH students throughout Arizona. She has supervised
pre-service teachers in the Deaf education teacher program at the University of Arizona and has
provided guided mentorship in the area of classroom management. Dr. Antia has presented and
published extensively throughout her career. Recently, she developed a web-based series of
literacy workshops presented by leading researchers in the field of Deaf education. The
workshops were made available to 60 participants across the nation. Within two days, the 60
available slots were filled and another 80 interested participants were put on a waiting list for the
next broadcasting of the workshop series. Dr. Antia’s position as the director of the Deaf
education teacher preparation program at the University of Arizona over the last 30 years will
provide the team with numerous contacts in programs and schools for DHH students throughout
the country to widen the scope of our dissemination measures. Dr. Rivera has conducted several
workshops with teachers at local and remote programs for DHH students (e.g., Clarke Schools
for the Deaf in Northampton, MA and the Desert Valleys Regional Cooperative in Phoenix, AZ).
She has also provided coaching to teachers of DHH students in the area of behavior
management.
Specifically, the research team will use the results of this study to design professional
development for teachers of DHH students in local programs and web-based modules for
teachers of DHH students across the country, present at conferences, and generate publications to
be submitted to practitioner and research journals within Deaf education. The goal of the
workshops, modules, presentations, and publications will be to provide teachers and supervisors
with practical strategies and methods for classroom management that have been correlated with
improved student academic engagement specifically for DHH students.
Future dissemination of findings from this project, beyond the duration of this project,
will involve (1) the incorporation of methods to classroom management practices specific to
DHH students in Deaf education teacher preparation programs and (2) the continued
development of classroom management video webinars to provide continuing education credits
for teachers. Teachers of DHH students living in remote areas and across the country will benefit
CATALANO 17
from the video webinars. Furthermore, the findings of this project will highlight the need for
further research that investigates the impact of classroom management professional development
for teachers on the reading, writing, and language skills of DHH students.
CATALANO 18
APPENDIX A
Not applicable
CATALANO 19
APPENDIX B
1. Figure B.1 CLAD Quality of Classroom Learning Environment (Q-CLE) Rating Scale
2. Figure B.2 Roles and Responsibilities of Personnel
CATALANO 20
Figure B.1 CLAD Quality of Classroom Learning Environment (Q-CLE) Rating Scale
Category: Instructional Delivery (ID)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor
Exemplary
instructional
delivery is almost
never purposeful
and focused on
student outcomes
almost never.
Exemplary
instructional
delivery is rarely
purposeful and
focused on student
outcomes.
Exemplary
instructional
delivery is
purposeful and
focused on student
outcomes less than
half of the time.
Exemplary
instructional
delivery is
purposeful and
focused on student
outcomes more
than half of the
time.
Instructional
delivery is often
purposeful and
focused on student
outcomes.
Instructional
delivery is
exemplary of being
purposeful and
focused on student
outcomes.
Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators
According to the
Classroom
Observation Coding
Scheme, <10% of
class time is spent in
instruction, rather
than non-instruction.
Teacher almost
never checks for
student
understanding.
Checks for
understanding are
According to the
Classroom
Observation Coding
Scheme, 11-25% of
class time is spent in
instruction, rather
than non-instruction.
Teacher rarely
checks for student
understanding.
Checks for
understanding are
According to the
Classroom
Observation Coding
Scheme, 26-49% of
class time is spent in
instruction, rather
than non-instruction.
Teacher checks
understanding for a
few students.
Checks for
understanding are
According to the
Classroom
Observation Coding
Scheme, 50-75% of
class time is spent in
instruction, rather
than non-instruction.
Teacher checks
understanding for
some students.
Checks for
understanding are
According to the
Classroom
Observation Coding
Scheme, 76-89% of
class time is spent in
instruction, rather
than non-instruction.
Teacher checks
understanding for
most students.
Checks for
understanding are
According to the
Classroom
Observation Coding
Scheme, 90-100%
of class time is spent
in instruction, rather
than non-instruction.
Teacher consistently
and routinely checks
for all student
understanding (e.g.,
think, pair, share;
thumbs up, thumbs
down).
Checks for
understanding are
CATALANO 21
Category: Instructional Delivery (ID)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
not used to inform
instruction.
Teacher almost
never individualizes
instruction. Teacher
does not take
advantage of
opportunities to
differentiate
instruction.
Teacher does not
deliver content and
material in a
systematic way
and/or stated
objective was not
followed. Essential
elements of
instruction are not
present.
rarely used to
inform instruction.
Teacher rarely
provided
individualized
instruction; whole
class instruction was
observed for most of
the set with rare
evidence that the
teacher takes
advantage of
opportunities to
differentiate
instruction.
Teacher rarely
delivers content and
material in a
systematic way that
vaguely follows the
stated objective.
Three or more
essential elements
are not evidenced.
seldom used to
inform instruction.
Teacher provides
individualized
instruction less than
half the time.
Teacher primarily
uses whole class
instruction and may
take advantage of
opportunities to
differentiated
instruction.
Teacher delivers
content and material
in a systematic way
that somewhat
follows the stated
objective less than
half the time.
Essential elements
are not clearly
evidenced.
used to inform
instruction for some
students.
Teacher provides
individualized
instruction more
than half the time.
Teacher uses whole
class instruction, but
takes advantage of
opportunities to
differentiate
instruction more
than half the time.
More than half the
time, teacher
delivers content and
material in a
systematic way that
may follows the
stated objective.
Essential elements
of instruction are
observed more than
half the time; one or
two elements were
used to inform
instruction for most
students.
Teacher often
provides
individualized
instruction for
remediation or
reinforcement.
Teacher may use
whole class
instruction, but takes
advantage of
opportunities to
differentiate
instruction.
Teacher often
delivers content and
material in a
systematic way that
follows the stated
objective. Most
essential elements of
instruction are
observed or are
present with some
detail.
used to inform
instruction for all
students.
Teacher consistently
and routinely
provides
individualized
(differentiated,
personalized,
tailored) instruction
for remediation
and/or
reinforcement.
Teacher consistently
and routinely
delivers content and
material in a
systematic way that
follows the stated
objective. Essential
elements of
instruction are
observed (i.e.,
anticipatory set,
input, modeling,
CATALANO 22
Category: Instructional Delivery (ID)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
Pacing is almost
always too fast or
too slow.
Teacher questions
are not appropriate
for the instructional
content and so not
promote student
learning. Questions
do not promote
higher level
thinking.
Wait time is almost
never provided;
teacher typically
answers questions
Pacing of instruction
is too fast, too slow,
or the same
regardless of
content.
Few teacher
questions are
appropriate for the
instructional content
and promote student
learning. Questions
rarely promote
higher level
thinking.
Wait time is rarely
evidenced.
Less than half the
time pacing of
instruction is
appropriate
(instruction is too
fast, too slow, or the
same regardless of
content).
Some teacher
questions are
appropriate for the
instructional content
and promote student
learning. Questions
promote higher level
thinking less than
half the time.
Wait time is
inconsistent (often
too long or too
short) and/or
not observed and/or
are not presented
clearly.
More than half the
time pacing of
instruction is
appropriate (may be
too fast at times or
too slow at times).
Many teacher
questions are
appropriate for the
instructional content
and promote student
learning. Questions
promote higher level
thinking more than
half the time.
Wait time may vary
but is sometimes
long enough to
allow students to
Pacing of instruction
is mostly
appropriate (not too
fast, not too slow).
Almost all teacher
questions are
appropriate for the
instructional content
and promote student
learning. Questions
usually promote
higher level
thinking.
Wait time is usually
long enough to
allow students to
consider their
checks for
understanding,
guided practice,
independent
practice, and
closure).
Pacing of instruction
is consistently and
routinely
appropriate (not too
fast, not too slow).
All teacher
questions are
appropriate for the
instructional content
and promote student
learning. Questions
promote higher level
thinking.
Wait time is
sufficiently long to
allow students to
consider their
CATALANO 23
Category: Instructional Delivery (ID)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
without waiting for
students to respond.
Teacher almost
never gives all
students
opportunities to
participate; only 1-2
students are called
on all the time.
Teacher rarely gives
all students
opportunities to
participate. Teacher
calls on the same
students repeatedly.
inappropriate for
instructional
content.
Teacher gives some
students
opportunities to
participate less than
half the time.
consider their
responses. Unclear
if wait time is
appropriate for
instructional
content.
Teacher gives some
students
opportunities to
participate more
than half the time.
responses and
usually appropriate
for instructional
content.
Teacher often gives
most students
opportunities to
participate.
responses and is
appropriate for
instructional
purpose (e.g.,
shorter for reviews,
longer for new
content)
Teacher consistently
and routinely gives
all students
opportunities to
participate.
Category: Instructional Clarity (IC)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor
Clarity of instruction
is almost never
evident; teacher
instruction is
confusing or lacks
purpose. Students
unable to follow
instruction.
Clarity of instruction
is rarely evident.
Students do not
always follow
instruction.
Clarity of instruction
is evident less than
half of the time.
Students follow
instruction less than
half of the time.
Clarity of instruction
is evident more
than half of the
time. Students
follow most teacher
instructions
independently.
Clarity of instruction
is often evident.
Students
consistently follow
instructions with
minimal
clarification.
Clarity of instruction
is evident and
exemplary.
Students follow
instructions
independently.
CATALANO 24
Category: Instructional Clarity (IC)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators
Objectives are not
shared with
students.
Explanation of
instructional content
and directions lacks
clarity and intent.
Teacher almost
never responds to
Objectives are
shared with students
during instruction
but are vague and/or
confusing.
Explanation of
instructional content
and directions is
rarely delivered with
clarity and intent.
Teacher rarely
responds to students
Objectives are
shared with students
some time during
instruction but may
or may not be
complete.
Explanation of
instructional content
and directions is
delivered with
clarity and intent
less than half of the
time.
Teacher responds to
students in ways that
maximize learning
Objectives are given
at the beginning of
instruction but are
too general.
Explanation of
instructional content
and directions is
delivered with
clarity and intent
most of the time.
Teacher responds to
students in ways that
maximize learning
Objectives are stated
by the teacher at the
beginning of
instruction with
some detail.
Explanation of
instructional content
and directions is
often delivered with
clarity and intent.
Teacher often
responds to students
Objectives are
explicitly stated at
the beginning of a
lesson and involve
students (e.g.,
students repeat or
read objectives).
Explanation of
instructional content
and directions is
delivered with
clarity and intent
(e.g., adjusts mode
of communication,
explains content or
directions in
different ways,
breaks down content
or directions into
smaller steps,
provides examples
and/or non-
examples).
Teacher consistently
and routinely
responds to students
CATALANO 25
Category: Instructional Clarity (IC)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
students in ways that
maximize learning.
Teacher almost
never ensures that
all students have
visual and auditory
access to instruction,
materials, and
interactions among
adults and peers
(e.g., instructs with
back to students,
does not use FM
systems, does not
allow time for
students to adjust to
speaker, or does not
call attention to
individual speakers).
in ways that
maximize learning.
Teacher rarely
ensures that all
students have visual
and auditory access
to instruction,
materials, and
interaction among
adults and peers.
less than half the
time.
Teacher ensures that
students have visual
and auditory access
to instruction,
materials, and
interaction among
adults and peers less
than half of the time.
more than half the
time.
Teacher ensures that
students have visual
and auditory access
to instruction,
materials, and
interaction among
adults and peers
more than half of the
time.
in ways that
maximize learning.
Teacher often
ensures that all
students have visual
and auditory access
to instruction,
materials, and
interaction among
adults and peers.
in ways that
maximize learning
(e.g., extends
students’ responses,
requires students to
support responses,
remediates
responses, and
provides feedback
that supports student
learning and higher
order thinking).
Teacher consistently
and routinely
ensures that all
students have visual
and auditory access
to instruction,
materials, and
interaction among
adults and peers
(e.g., instructs in full
view of students
except for auditory
training purposes,
uses FM systems,
allows time for
students to adjust to
speaker, and calls
CATALANO 26
Category: Instructional Clarity (IC)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
attention to
individual speakers).
Category: Classroom Orientation, Organization and Planning (COOP)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor
Classroom
organization is
almost never evident. Planning
and routines are
almost never
evident.
Classroom is rarely
organization.
Planning and
routines are rarely
evident.
Classroom is
organized less than
half the time.
Planning and
routines are evident
less than half the
time.
Classroom is
organized more
than half the time.
Planning and
routines are evident
more than half the
time.
Classroom is often
organized. Planning
and routines are
consistently evident.
Classroom
organization is
exemplary.
Advanced planning
and routines are
evident.
Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators
Classroom has a
generally chaotic
feel.
No observable,
efficient, and
working system is in
place for organizing
students. High
reliance on
reminders for routine
activities.
An observable,
efficient, and
working system is
rarely in place for
organizing students.
Some reliance on
reminders for routine
activities.
Less than half of the
time an observable,
efficient, and
working system is in
place for organizing
students. Students
somewhat reliant on
reminders for routine
activities.
More than half of the
time an observable,
efficient, and
working system is in
place for organizing
students. Students
not as reliant on
reminders for routine
activities.
Observable,
efficient, and
working system in
place for organizing
students. Students
not reliant on
specific reminders
for routine activities.
Use of system may
be explicit.
Classroom runs like
a well-oiled
machine.
Exemplary evidence
that an observable,
efficient, and
working system in
place for organizing
students. Teacher is
observed explicitly
using system.
CATALANO 27
Category: Classroom Orientation, Organization and Planning (COOP)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
Activities do not run
smoothly. Teacher
frequently disrupts
instruction to
reorganize students
and materials.
Students spend
substantial amounts
of time waiting for
the teacher to
instruction.
Materials for
instruction are
almost never
organized and
available.
Disruptions to locate
materials are
common. Students
almost never have
access to materials
for learning (e.g.,
journals, worksheets,
pencils, markers,
etc.).
Teacher almost
never communicates
expectations for
Activities rarely run
smoothly. Teacher
frequently disrupts
instruction to
reorganize students
and materials.
Materials for
instruction are rarely
organized and
available. Teacher
frequently disrupts
instruction to locate
materials. Students
rarely have access to
materials for
learning (e.g.,
journals, worksheets,
pencils, markers,
etc.).
Teacher rarely
communicates
expectations for
Activities run
smoothly less than
half of the time.
Teacher may disrupt
activities to
reorganize students
or materials.
Materials for
instruction are
organized and
available less than
half the time.
Students have access
to materials for
learning (e.g.,
journals, worksheets,
pencils, markers,
etc.) less than half of
the time.
Less than half of the
time teacher
communicates
Activities run
smoothly more than
half the time;
occasional
disruptions from
within the classroom
sometimes affect
instruction.
Materials for
instruction are
organized and
available more than
half the time.
Students have access
to materials for
learning (e.g.,
journals, worksheets,
pencils, markers,
etc.) more than half
of the time.
More than half of the
time teacher
communicates
Activities run
smoothly; occasional
disruptions happen
from within the
classroom but do not
affect instruction.
Materials for
instruction are often
organized and
readily available.
Students often have
access to materials
for learning (e.g.,
journals, worksheets,
pencils, markers,
etc.).
Teacher often
communicates
expectations for
Activities run
smoothly;
disruptions from
within the classroom
are rare. Students
spend virtually all of
their time in
meaningful
instruction.
Materials for
instruction are
consistently and
routinely organized
and readily
available. Students
have easy access to
materials for
learning (e.g.,
journals, worksheets,
pencils, markers,
etc.).
Teacher consistently
and routinely
communicates
CATALANO 28
Category: Classroom Orientation, Organization and Planning (COOP)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
transitions.
Transitions are
almost never
effective for students
and are
unnecessarily long.
transitions.
Transitions are
rarely effective for
students and are
unnecessarily long.
expectations for
transitions.
Transitions are
effective for students
less than half of the
time.
expectations for
transitions clearly
and precisely.
Transitions are quick
and effective for
students more than
half of the time.
transitions clearly
and precisely.
Transitions are often
quick and effective
for students.
expectations for
transitions clearly
and precisely.
Transitions are quick
and effective for
students.
Category: Behavior Management and Control/Discipline (BMCD)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor
A behavior
management system
is almost never
evident.
A behavior
management system
is rarely evident.
A behavior
management system
is evident less than
half the time.
A behavior
management system
is evident more
than half the time.
A behavior
management system
is often in place.
An exemplary,
consistent, and
effective behavior
management plan is
in place.
Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators
Teacher is almost
never in charge.
Teacher does not
recognize
opportunities to
Teacher is rarely in
charge. Students
seem to choose what
activities to
participate in and
complete.
Teacher rarely
recognizes
opportunities to
Teacher is in charge
less than half of the
time.
Teacher recognizes
opportunities to
redirect students less
Teacher is in charge
more than half of the
time.
Teacher recognizes
opportunities to
redirect students
Teacher is often in
charge.
Teacher often
recognizes
opportunities to
Teacher is clearly in
charge (i.e.,
authoritative).
Teacher consistently
recognizes
opportunities to
CATALANO 29
Category: Behavior Management and Control/Discipline (BMCD)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
redirect students.
Discipline is
reactive, negative,
and/or punitive. A
behavior
management system
is not evident.
Non-student
disruptions are
almost never
handled effectively
(e.g., visitor to the
room, fire drill).
When disruptions
occur, students
become chaotic.
redirect students.
Discipline is
frequently reactive
and rarely proactive.
Teacher reacts to
student behavior
issues as they occur.
Non-student
disruptions are
rarely handled
effectively (e.g.,
visitor to the room,
fire drill). When
disruptions occur,
students don’t know
what to do.
than half the time.
Discipline is
proactive less than
half of the time and
reactive more than
half the time. A
behavior
management system
may or may not be
in place (e.g.,
teacher gives
frequent warnings,
holds lengthy
discussions about
behavior).
Less than half of the
time non-student
disruptions are
handled quickly and
effectively (e.g.,
visitor to the room,
fire drill). When
disruptions occur,
students don’t seem
to know what to do.
more than half the
time. Discipline is
proactive, positive,
and corrective more
than half of the time.
A behavior
management system
is in place, but may
not be used
effectively.
More than half of
the time non-student
disruptions are
handled quickly and
effectively (e.g.,
visitor to the room,
fire drill).
redirect students.
Discipline is often
proactive, positive,
and corrective. A
behavior
management system
seems to be in place.
Non-student
disruptions are often
handled quickly and
effectively (e.g.,
visitor to the room,
fire drill).
redirect students.
Discipline is
consistently
proactive, positive,
and corrective. An
effective behavior
management system
is in place.
Non-student
disruptions are
consistently and
routinely handled
quickly and
effectively (e.g.,
visitor to the room,
fire drill). Students
remain working or
reorient quickly after
the disruption is
over.
CATALANO 30
Category: Behavior Management and Control/Discipline (BMCD)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
Teacher almost
always
communicates to
students what
behaviors they did
wrong, rather than
what they did right
or how they can
correct their
behavior.
Teacher
communicates what
behaviors students
did wrong, rather
than what they did
right or how they
can correct their
behavior.
Less than half the
time, teacher
communicates
behavioral
expectations clearly
and correctively.
More than half the
time, teacher
communicates
behavioral
expectations clearly
and correctively.
Teacher often
communicates
behavioral
expectations clearly
and correctively.
Teacher consistently
and routinely
communicates
behavioral
expectations clearly
and correctively by
using student models
for corrective
behaviors,
communicating what
a student did
correctly so
appropriate behavior
continues, and/or
providing corrective
feedback to improve
inappropriate
behaviors.
Category: Warmth and Responsiveness (WR)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor Descriptor
Learning
environment is
almost never positive. Students
are almost never
active members of
Learning
environment is
rarely positive.
Students are rarely
active members of
Learning
environment is
positive less than
half the time.
Students are active
members of the
Learning
environment is
positive more than
half the time.
Students are active
members of the
Learning
environment is often
positive. Students
are consistently
active members of
Learning
environment is
positive and
exemplary. Students
are active members
CATALANO 31
Category: Warmth and Responsiveness (WR)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
the learning
community.
the learning
community.
learning community
less than half the
time.
learning community
more than half the
time.
the learning
community.
of the learning
community.
Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators
During instructional
and non-
instructional
situations, teacher
talk is never
encouraging and
respectful.
Teacher talk is
sarcastic and/or
angry.
Teacher affect is
negative (e.g.,
scowls, frowns).
Teacher does not
encourage respect
among students.
When students work
together, peer
support is not
encouraged.
During instructional
and non-
instructional
situations, teacher
talk is rarely
encouraging and
respectful.
Teacher talk is often
negative.
Teacher affect is
rarely positive; it is
neutral or hard to
read.
Teacher rarely
encourages respect
among students.
When students work
together, peer
support is rarely
encouraged.
Students are rude or
During instructional
and non-
instructional
situations, teacher
talk is encouraging
and respectful less
than half the time.
Teacher affect is
positive less than
half the time.
Teacher affect is
frequently neutral or
hard to read.
Teacher encourages
respect among
students less than
half the time.
Students are
occasionally rude or
disrespectful to each
other. When students
During instructional
and non-
instructional
situations, teacher
talk is encouraging
and respectful more
than half the time.
Teacher affect is
positive more than
half the time.
Teacher affect is
occasionally neutral
or hard to read.
Teacher encourages
respect among
students more than
half the time. When
students work
together, peer
support is
During instructional
and non-
instructional
situations, teacher
talk is often
encouraging and
respectful.
Teacher affect is
often positive (not
neutral or negative).
Teacher often
encourages respect
among students.
When students work
together, peer
support is often
encouraged.
During instructional
and non-
instructional
situations, teacher
talk is always
encouraging
(positive and
supportive) and
respectful.
Teacher affect is
consistently positive
(not neutral or
negative).
Teacher consistently
encourages respect
among students.
When students work
together, peer
support is
consistently
encouraged.
CATALANO 32
Category: Warmth and Responsiveness (WR)
Rating 1
<10%
Rating 2
11-25%
Rating 3
26-49%
Rating 4
50-75%
Rating 5
76-89%
Rating 6
90-100%
Students are rude or
disrespectful to each
other; teacher does
not intervene or
joins in.
Teacher almost
never provides
specific positive
attention to reinforce
instruction or
behavior.
disrespectful to each
other; teacher rarely
intervenes.
Teacher rarely
provides specific
positive attention to
reinforce instruction
or behavior.
work together, peer
support is
encouraged less than
half the time.
Teacher provides
specific positive
attention to reinforce
instruction and/or
behavior less than
half the time.
encouraged more
than half the time.
Teacher provides
specific and/or
appropriate amount
of positive attention
to reinforce
instruction and/or
behavior more than
half the time.
Teacher often
provides specific
positive attention to
reinforce instruction
and/or behavior.
Teacher consistently
provides specific
positive attention
(e.g., feedback,
praise,
acknowledgement)
to reinforce
instruction and/or
behavior.
CATALANO 33
Figure B.2 Roles and Responsibilities of Personnel
Roles Team Member Responsibilities Time/Months
Principal
Investigator/
Project
Director
Jennifer Catalano Overall management of project,
including coordinating with
senior/key personnel and
stakeholders, research design,
budget oversight, recruitment of
GRAs, coding, data analysis, and
completion of reports for IES
Development and
implementation of workshops,
publications, and presentations
.75 FTE/two
academic years
and
1.0 FTE/one
summer month
Co-Principal
Investigator
Dr. Shirin Antia Consultation with research
design and data analyses for this
project
Recruitment of GRAs
Communication with CLAD
leadership
Mediator for disputes and
conflicts among team members
Development and
implementation of workshops,
publications, and presentations
.10 FTE/two
academic years
Research
Collaborator
Dr. Christina Rivera
Establishment of reliability for
the observational coding systems
Preparation of GRAs for coding
Consultation
Development and
implementation of workshops,
publications, and presentations
.15 FTE/two
academic years
and
1.0 FTE/one
summer month
Research
Collaborator
Carol Buuck Establishment of reliability for
the observational coding systems
Preparation of GRAs for coding
.05 FTE/one
academic year
Graduate
Research
Associates (2)
TBH Coding
Preparation of descriptive and
correlational results for
publication and presentation
.50 FTE
each/one
academic year
and
.50 FTE
each/one
summer month
FTE = Full Time Employment
AY = Academic Year = 9 months
CATALANO 34
APPENDIX C
Not applicable
CATALANO 35
APPENDIX D
The following Letters of Agreement demonstrate the support that will be provided to the research
team toward the successful completion of this project.
1. Michael N. Griffith, M.S., Director of the Department of Instructional and Learning
Technologies at the University of Arizona, College of Education
2. Mark Borgstrom, Ph.D., Principal Statistical Consultant for the Research Computing
Group of the University Information Technology Services (UITS) at the University of
Arizona
3. Amy Lederberg, Ph.D., Principal Investigator for Center on Literacy and Deafness
(CLAD) at Georgia State University
CATALANO 36
November 9, 2015
Mrs. Jennifer Catalano
University of Arizona, College of Education
Department of Disability and Psychoeducational Studies
Box 210069
Tucson, AZ 85721
Dear Mrs. Catalano,
As the Director of the Department of Instructional and Learning Technologies at the University
of Arizona, College of Education, I am pleased to offer my support and cooperation toward the
successful completion of your research project. During the second year of the project, I
understand that your research team will be developing video modules for professional
development in the area of classroom management to disseminate to teachers of DHH students
across the country. I gladly offer you full access to video production services through the
Department of Instructional and Learning Technologies in the College of Education. With the
support of our media specialist, Do Pham, you will be able to record, edit, and produce video
modules for web-based dissemination.
We look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
Michael N. Griffith, M.S.
University of Arizona, College of Education
Office of the Dean
Director, Department of Instructional and Learning Technologies
P.O. Box 210069
Tucson, AZ 85721
CATALANO 37
November 10, 2015
Mrs. Jennifer Catalano
University of Arizona, College of Education
Department of Disability and Psychoeducational Studies
Box 210069
Tucson, AZ 85721
Dear Mrs. Catalano,
As the principal statistical consultant with the Research Computing Group of University
Information Technology Services (UITS) at the University of Arizona, I am pleased to offer my
support and cooperation toward the successful completion of your research project. During the
first year of the project, I understand that your research team will require statistical support for
the data analytical procedures associated with your study. I gladly offer you access to my
services as a statistical consultant by providing expert consultation and guidance based on 30
years of experience as a statistician. Specifically, I will provide assistance with the
implementation and analyses of multiple regression and descriptive statistic procedures via SPSS
software.
I look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
Mark Borgstrom, Ph.D.
University of Arizona, University Information Technology Services
Principal, Research Computing Group
1077 North Highland Avenue
Tucson, AZ 85721
CATALANO 38
November 12, 2015
Mrs. Jennifer Catalano
University of Arizona, College of Education
Department of Disability and Psychoeducational Studies
Box 210069
Tucson, AZ 85721
Dear Mrs. Catalano,
As principal investigator of the Center on Literacy and Deafness (CLAD), I am pleased to offer
my support and cooperation toward the successful completion of your research project. We offer
full access to our video recordings of classrooms serving Deaf and Hard of Hearing (DHH)
students from the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school years. The CLAD Co-Principal Investigators and
I understand that you will be using the videos to investigate classroom management practices and
student academic engagement. We also understand that after the completion of your study you
will make professional development opportunities available to teachers of DHH students
throughout the country to improve their classroom management practices. We are excited that
you will be using the videos to work toward improving the engagement and performance of
DHH students in self-contained classrooms. Additionally, the CLAD Co-Principal Investigators
and I at Georgia State University will act as an advisory committee to your research team to
provide consultation and conflict resolution as needed.
We look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
Amy R. Lederberg, Ph.D.
Regents’ Professor
Educational Psychology, Special Education, & Communication Disorders
Director, Center on Literacy and Deafness
Co-Director, Research on the Challenges of Acquiring Language and Literacy
Box 3979
Georgia State University
Atlanta, GA 30302
CATALANO 39
APPENDIX E
Not applicable
CATALANO 40
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES CITED
Antia, S. D., Sabers, D. L., & Stinson, M. S. (2007). Validity and reliability of the classroom
participation questionnaire with deaf and hard of hearing students in public schools.
Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 12(2), 158-171.
Barker, D. H., Quittner, A. L., Fink, N. E., Eisenberg, L. S., Tobey, E. A., Niparko, J. K., &
CDaCI INVESTIGATIVE TEAM. (2009). Predicting behavior problems in deaf and
hearing children: The influences of language, attention, and parent–child communication.
Development and Psychopathology, 21(2), 373-392. doi:10.1017/S0954579409000212
Brophy, J. (1988). Research linking teacher behavior to student achievement: Potential
implications for instruction of Chapter 1 students. Educational Psychologist, 23(3), 235-
286.
Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., & Morrison, F. J. (2005). Effects of variation in teacher
organization on classroom functioning. Journal of School Psychology, 43(1), 61-85.
Connor, C. M., Son, S. H., Hindman, A. H., & Morrison, F. J. (2005). Teacher qualifications,
classroom practices, family characteristics, and preschool experience: Complex effects on
first graders' vocabulary and early reading outcomes. Journal of School Psychology,
43(4), 343-375.
Connor, C. M., Spencer, M., Day, S. L., Giuliani, S., Ingebrand, S. W., McLean, L., & Morrison,
F. J. (2014). Capturing the complexity: Content, type, and amount of instruction and
quality of the classroom learning environment synergistically predict third graders’
vocabulary and reading comprehension outcomes. Journal of educational psychology,
106(3), 762.
Davis, J. M., Elfenbein, J., Schum, R., & Bentler, R. A. (1986). Effects of mild and moderate
hearing impairments. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 51(1), 53-62.
Day, S. L., Connor, C. M., & McClelland, M. M. (2015). Children's behavioral regulation and
literacy: The impact of the first grade classroom environment. Journal of School
Psychology, 53(5), 409-428.
Emmer, E. T., & Stough, L. M. (2001). Classroom management: A critical part of educational
psychology, with implications for teacher education. Educational Psychologist, 36(2),
103-112.
Finn, J. D., Pannozzo, G. M., & Voelkl, K. E. (1995). Disruptive and inattentive-withdrawn
behavior and achievement among fourth graders. The Elementary School Journal, 421-
434.
CATALANO 41
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the
concept, state of the evidence. Review of educational research, 74(1), 59-109.
doi:10.3102/00346543074001059
Gallaudet Research Institute. (2011). Regional and national summary report of data from the
2009-10 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth, Washington,
DC: GRI, Gallaudet University.
Gann, C. J., Gaines, S. E., Antia, S. D., Umbreit, J., & Liaupsin, C. J. (2015). Evaluating the
effects of function-based interventions with deaf or hard of hearing students. Journal of
Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 0(0), 1-14. doi: 10.1093/deafed/env011
Greenwood, C. R., Horton, B. T., & Utley, C. A. (2002). Academic engagement: Current
perspectives on research and practice. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 328-349.
Guardino, C., & Antia, S. D. (2012). Modifying the classroom environment to increase
engagement and decrease disruption with students who are deaf or hard of hearing.
Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 17(4), 518-533.
Doi:10.1093/deafed/ens026
McGarity, J. R., & Butts, D. P. (1984). The relationship among teacher classroom management
behavior, student engagement, and student achievement of middle and high school
science students of varying aptitude. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(1), 55-
61.
Meinzen-Derr, J., Wiley, S., Grether, S., Phillips, J., Choo, D., Hibner, J., & Barnard, H. (2014).
Functional communication of children who are deaf or hard-of-hearing. Journal of
Development and Behavioral Pediatrics, 35(3), 197-206. doi:
10.1097/DBP.0000000000000048
Oliver, R. M., & Reschly, D. J. (2010). Special education teacher preparation in classroom
management: Implications for students with emotional and behavioral disorders.
Behavioral Disorders, 35, 188-199.
Piwowar, V., Thiel, F., & Ophardt, D. (2013). Training inservice teachers' competencies in
classroom management. A quasi-experimental study with teachers of secondary schools.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 30, 1-12.
Qi, S., & Mitchell, R. E. (2012). Large-scale academic achievement testing of deaf and hard-of-
hearing students: Past, present, and future. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education,
17(1), 1-18. doi:10.1093/deafed/enr028
Reinke, W. M., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Merrell, K. (2008). The classroom check-up: A classwide
teacher consultation model for increasing praise and decreasing disruptive behavior.
School Psychology Review, 37(3), 315-332.
CATALANO 42
Simonsen, B., Fairbanks, S., Briesch, A., Myers, D., & Sugai, G. (2008). Evidence-based
practices in classroom management: Considerations for research to practice. Education
and Treatment of Children, 31(3), 351-380.
Stevenson, J., McCann, D., Watkin, P., Worsfold, S., & Kennedy, C. (2010). The relationship
between language development and behaviour problems in children with hearing loss.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51(1), 77-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-
7610.2009.02124
Theunissen, S. C. P. M., Rieffe, C., Kouwenberg, M., De Raeve, L. J. I., Soede, W., Briaire, J. J.,
& Frijns, J. H. M. (2014). Behavioral problems in school-aged hearing-impaired children:
The influence of sociodemographic, linguistic, and medical factors. European Child &
Adolescent Psychiatry, 23(4), 187-196. doi:10.1007/s00787-013-0444-4
Traxler, C. B. (2000). The Stanford Achievement Test: National norming and performance
standards for deaf and hard-of-hearing students. Journal of deaf studies and deaf
education, 5(4), 337-348. doi:10.1093/deafed/5.4.337
Trussell, R. P. (2008). Classroom universals to prevent problem behaviors. Intervention in
School and Clinic, 43(3), 179-185. doi:10.1177/1053451207311678
Umbreit, J., Ferro, J., Liaupsin, C. J., & Lane, K. L. (2007). Functional behavioral assessment
and function-based intervention. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Wesley, D. A., & Vocke, D. E. (1992, February). Classroom Discipline and Teacher Education.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association of Teacher Educators, Orlando,
FL.
CATALANO 43
RESEARCH ON HUMAN SUBJECTS NARRATIVE
Exempt Research on Human Subjects Narrative
According to the U.S. Department of Education’s Regulations for the Protection of
Human Subjects overview, this research project, “Effective Classroom Management Practices for
Classroom Teachers of Students who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing (DHH)”, qualifies for
exemption from coverage by the Human Subjects Regulations. The involvement of human
subjects included in the research activities for this project falls under the first exemption
category:
(1) Research conducted in established or commonly accepted educational settings,
involving normal educational practices, such as (a) research on regular and special
education instructional strategies, or (b) research on the effectiveness of or the
comparison among instructional techniques, curricula, or classroom management
methods.
The video recordings that will be coded and analyzed were recorded during the 2013-14
and 2014-15 school years in classrooms for DHH students in several states and one province
during the first phase of a larger study implemented by the Center on Literacy and Deafness
(CLAD). The purpose of these video recordings was to capture normal educational practices for
students who are DHH across three times in one year (i.e., fall, winter, and spring). The videos
are currently being coded and analyzed for literacy instruction. Additionally, in the fall and
spring of these school years, a battery of assessments were conducted with some DHH students
in the observed classrooms, including phonological awareness, decoding, fluency, passage
comprehension, writing, speech perception, syntax, expressive vocabulary, receptive language,
fingerspelling, and sign language reception and production. To determine the relationships
between results of the assessments and the literacy instruction codes across time, data analytic
procedures will be conducted.
For the purposes of the proposed study, video recordings from the spring of both school
years will be observed to (1) measure the effectiveness of classroom management practices
through the use of a classroom learning environment rating scale and (2) determine the academic
engagement of elementary students who are DHH in self-contained classrooms through whole
interval recording procedures. The focus of the proposed project is on the effectiveness of
classroom management methods for “business-as-usual” instruction in self-contained elementary
classrooms for DHH students without the implementation of an intervention as an independent
variable. Additionally, the schools, teachers, and students on the video recordings are de-
identified through the use of assigned ID numbers.
CATALANO 44
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES OF SENIOR/KEY PERSONNEL
Biographical sketches are included for the following senior/key personnel:
1. Jennifer Catalano, Principal Investigator
2. Shirin Antia, co-Principal Investigator
CATALANO 45
Jennifer Catalano, M.A.
jennifercatalano@email.arizona.edu
EDUCATION
PhD University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona Expected 05/2018
Degree: PhD – Special Education
MA University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 12/1997 Degree: M.A. – Deaf Education
Thesis: Assessing the Multiple Intelligence of Children who are Deaf with the
DISCOVER Process and the Use of American Sign Language
BS S.U.N.Y. College at Cortland, Cortland, New York 05/1995
Degree: B.S. – Elementary Education
RESEARCH INTERESTS
Academic engagement of students who are deaf or hard-of-hearing (D/HH)
Function Behavioral Assessment and Function-Based Interventions with D/HH students
Universal classroom practices and classroom management strategies for pre- and in-
service teachers of D/HH students
Center-based learning for D/HH preschool and school-aged students
Literacy and language instruction for D/HH students
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Research Assistant 8/2013 – Present Center for Literacy and Deafness
University of Arizona – Tucson, AZ
Perform data analysis for three single-subject vocabulary intervention studies
Organize data collection
Collaborate with research team on all aspects of the intervention
Developed treatment integrity procedures
Developed a vocabulary intervention program and piloted the intervention with four
D/HH students
Teacher of Exceptional Student Education/SST Coordinator 8/2011 – 5/2013 Key West Montessori Charter School – Key West, FL
Provided ESE services to students in grades 1-7 in resource and inclusion settings while
aligning individualized goals with the Common Core standards and Montessori
philosophy
Coordinated Student Services Team process for students with behavioral and academic
needs by conducting observations, progress monitoring, and team meetings with teachers
and parents
Implemented small group reading intervention sessions with struggling readers
Assessed ESE and general education students in reading using the Developmental
Reading Assessment-2 and Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading (FAIR)
CATALANO 46
ASD/Varying Exceptionalities Teacher 8/2008 – 5/2011 Glynn Archer Elementary School – Key West, FL
Provided ESE services in a self-contained/resource K-2 classroom while teaching all
subject areas, meeting diverse educational and behavioral needs, and adhering to the
Florida Sunshine State Standards
Developed and implemented individualized behavior implementation plans for a variety
of behavioral needs including: eating with a spoon, following directions, minimizing
violent temper tantrums
Administered Florida Comprehensive Assessment Tests and Florida Alternate
Assessment Tests while ensuring students received individualized accommodations
Itinerant Teacher for D/HH Students 8/2003 – 5/2008 Monroe County School District – Key West to Key Largo, FL
Provided D/HH students with support in all areas including reading, writing, and
organizational skill building
Consulted directly with general education teachers to improve classroom conditions for
HI students
Conducted in-services for general education teachers in the areas of classroom
amplification systems, strategies for working with D/HH students, and basic sign
language
Implemented lessons to prepare inclusive students for the Florida Comprehensive
Assessment Tests
Provided technological support to students with visual impairments
Intensive Reading Teacher Grades 9-12 8/2004 – 5/2007
Key West High School – Key West, FL
Utilized CRISS (CReating Independence through Student owned Strategies) strategies to
teach struggling readers in the lowest 25th percentile in 9-12th grade
Implemented explicit, strategic, highly motivating lessons across all areas of reading
utilizing the Read 180 program
Managed whole group instruction and small group rotations including small group
instruction, instructional software, and modeled and independent reading
Preschool Teacher of Students who are Deaf 1/1998 – 7/2002
The Learning Center for the Deaf – Framingham, MA
Implemented activities in all areas of development while aligning goals with newly
developed curriculum state standards
Completed home visits with students and their parents to develop home/school
connections
Worked as a cooperating teacher with student teachers embarking on careers in Deaf
Education
Developed and led workshops on the Theory of Multiple Intelligences for fellow teachers
UNIVERSITY/COLLEGE TEACHING EXPERIENCE
SERP 402 Behavior Principles and Disability:
CATALANO 47
Assessment and Intervention 8/2015-12/2015
College of Education, Disability and Psychoeducational Studies
University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
Supervisor: John Umbreit, Ph.D.
Graded and evaluated assignments
Internship/Practicum Supervisor 8/2013 – 12/2014 Education of D/HH Students, College of Education, Disability and Psychoeducational Studies
University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
Supervisor: Kathryn Kreimeyer, Ph.D.
Provided feedback for weekly lesson plans
Provided detailed feedback via Panopto for video lesson plans
Evaluated and graded internship/practicum-related assignments
Conducted mid-term and final evaluations with interns and cooperating teachers
Collaborated with university supervisor to restructure assignments and maintain D2L
course website
SERP 556 Research Methods in Education – Assistant 6/2014 – 7/2014 College of Education, Disability and Psychoeducational Studies
University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
Supervisor: Phil Johnson, Ph.D.
Graded and maintained weekly discussion posts
Introduction to Sign Language, Part 1 and Part 2 8/2004 – 5/2006
Continuing Education
Florida Keys Community College, Key West, FL
PUBLICATIONS
Liaupsin, C. J., Catalano, J., & Hartzell, R. (In Press). Special education. In Wenzel, A.E. (Ed.),
The SAGE Encyclopedia of Abnormal and Clinical Psychology. (pp. TBD). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
PRESENTATIONS
Bohjanen, S. & Catalano, J. (2015). Re-examination of the Psychometric Properties of the
Preschool Wide Evaluation Tool. 39th Annual Teacher Educators for Children with
Behavioral Disorders Conference. Tempe, Arizona.
Rivera, M.C. & Catalano, J. (2015). Vocabulary Intervention for Deaf and Hard of Hearing
Students. Sequoia School for Deaf and Hard of Hearing. Mesa, Arizona.
HONORS AND AWARDS
Personnel Preparation Fellowship, University of Arizona, 2014-2018
Erasmus Circle Scholar, College of Education, University of Arizona, 2015
PEPSA/CARD Mentoring Program Partner, University of Miami, FL, 2012-2013
Inclusion Teacher of the Year, Glynn Archer School, Key West, FL, 2008-2009
CATALANO 48
David Wolkowsky Teacher of Merit Award, Key West High School, Key West, FL, 2006
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS
Council for Exceptional Children – Division of Communicative Disabilities and Deafness
American Educational Research Association – Divisions: Research on the Education of
Deaf Persons, Classroom Management, and Teaching and Teacher Education,
CERTIFICATIONS
Arizona Teaching Certificate, Hearing Impaired
Arizona Teaching Certificate, Cross-Categorical Special Education
Arizona Teaching Certificate, Elementary Education
Arizona Teaching Endorsement, English as a Second Language
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Council for Exceptional Children, San Diego, CA, 4/2015
Center for Autism and Related Disabilities (CARD) 20th Annual Statewide Conference,
St. Petersburg, FL, 1/2013
Response to Intervention Training, ongoing
Florida Educators of Deaf/Hard of Hearing Individuals Annual Conference, Orlando, FL,
12/2007
Professional Crisis Management Certification, 8/2009-5/2010
Other noteworthy professional development/trainings includes: Functional Behavior
Assessments, Florida Alternate Assessment, LAS Links, Standing Up For Me, Sunshine
Connections, LEAPS, Read 180, CRISS, FAIR, Everyday Counts, SUMS
SERVICE ACTIVITIES
Reviewer for Beyond Behavior (BB). 3/2015
Reviewer for Council for Exceptional Children 2016 Conference proposals for the
Strategies for Entry into the Special Education Career topic area. 8/2015
CATALANO 49
Shirin Dara Antia, Ph.D.
santia@email.arizona.edu
Current Position
Meyerson Distinguished Professor of Disability and Rehabilitation. Special Education Program,
Department of Disability and Psychoeducational Studies, University of Arizona
Responsibilities: Coordinate Graduate Program to prepare teachers of the Deaf/Hard of
Hearing students; teach master's and doctoral courses in the area of education of
Deaf/Hard of Hearing, language development, and research, advise master's and doctoral
students, obtain funding for research and teacher preparation.
Education B.A., (Education) 1971, Calcutta University
M.Ed., (Education of Hearing Impaired) 1973, University of Pittsburgh
Ph.D., (Special Education) 1979, University of Pittsburgh
Current Certification
Council on Education of the Deaf, Professional Certification, Elementary and Multi-
handicapped, 1972-present
Recent Selected Professional Publications
Antia, S. D. (2015) Enhancing academic and social outcomes:Balancing individual, family, and
school assets and risks for DHH students in general education. In H. Knoors & M.
Marschark (Eds.), Educating deaf students: Creating a global evidence base (pp 527-
546). Oxford University Press.
Easterbrooks, S. R., Lederberg, A. R., Antia, S. D., Schick, B., Kushalnagar, P., Webb, M., et al.
(2015). Reading among diverse DHH learners: What, how, and for whom? American
Annals of the Deaf, 159, 419-432.
Gann, C. J., Gaines, S., Antia, S. D., Umbreit, J., & Liaupsin, C. J. (2015). Evaluating the effects
of function-based interventions with Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing students. Journal of Deaf
Studies and Deaf Education, 20, 252-265.
Antia, S.D. & Kreimeyer, K.H. (2015). Social competence of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing
Children. New York: Oxford University Press.
Antia, S.D., & Metz, K. (2014). Co-enrollment in the United States: A critical analysis of
benefits and challenges. In M. Marschark, G. Tang, & H. Knoors (Eds.) Bilingualism and
Bilingual Deaf Education (pp 424-443). New York: Oxford University Press.
Antia, S. D., Reed, S., & Shaw, L. (2011). Risk and resilience for social competence: Deaf
students in general education classrooms In D. H. Zand (Ed.), Risk and resilience:
Adaptation in context of being deaf. New York: Springer.
Antia, S. D., Jones, P., Luckner, J., Kreimeyer, K. H., & Reed, S. (2011). Social outcomes of
students who are deaf and hard of hearing in general education classrooms. Exceptional
Children, 77, 487-502.
Benedict, K., Johnson, H., & Antia, S. D. (2011). Faculty needs, doctoral preparation, and the
future of teacher preparation programs in the educatio(Antia, In press)n of Deaf and hard
of Hearing students. American Annals of the Deaf, 156, 35-46.
CATALANO 50
.Antia, S. D., Kreimeyer, K. H., Metz, K., & Spolsky, S. (2011). Peer Interactions of Deaf and
Hard-of-Hearing children. In M. Marschark & P. Spencer (Eds.), Handbook of Deaf
Studies and Deaf Education (Vol. 1). New York: Oxford University Press.
Antia, S. D., Kreimeyer, K., H., & Reed, S. (2010). Supporting students in general education
classrooms. In M. Marschark & P. Spencer (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of deaf studies,
language, and education (Vol. 2, pp 72-92). New York: Oxford University Press.
Antia, S. D., Jones, P. B., Reed, S., & Kreimeyer, K. H. (2009). Academic status and progress of
deaf and hard-of-hearing students in general education classrooms. Journal of Deaf
Studies and Deaf Education, 14, 293-311.
Reed, S., Antia, S.D., & Kreimeyer, K.H. (2008) Academic status of deaf and hard-of-hearing
students in public schools: Student, home and service facilitators and detractors. Journal
of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 13, 458-502
Antia, S. D., Sabers, D., & Stinson, M. S. (2007). Validity and Reliability of the Classroom
Participation Questionnaire with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in Public Schools.
Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 12, 158-171.
McCain, K., & Antia, S. D. (2005). Academic and social status of Hearing, Deaf, and Hard-of-
Hearing students participating in a co-enrolled classroom. Communication Disorders
Quarterly, 27, 20-32.
Antia, S.D., Reed, S. & Kreimeyer, K.H. (2005) Written language of Deaf and Hard of Hearing
students in public schools. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 10, 244-255.
Antia, S. D., Stinson, M. S., & Gaustad, M. G. (2002). Developing membership in the education
of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing students in inclusive settings. Journal of Deaf Studies and
Deaf Education, 7, 214-229.
Antia, S. D., & Kreimeyer, K., H. (2001). The role of interpreters in inclusive classrooms.
American Annals of the Deaf, 146, 355-365.
Recent Grant Activity U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Educational Sciences. “Center for Literacy and
Deafness”. July 2013-June 2017. (Co-principal investigator at .30 FTE).
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. “High-Need Students who
are Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing: Teachers for the future”. January 2012 – Dec. 2017. Total
funds $1,249,746. (Principal Investigator at .20 FTE)
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. “Southwest Project to
Prepare Teachers of children who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing”. January 2009-
December 2012. Total funds $ 800,000.
U.S. Department of Education. “Excellence through collaboration: A doctoral preparation
planning grant proposal for DHH Education”. 2007-2008. Extended to Sept. 30 2009.
Subcontract with Michigan State University. Total funds $100,000; UA subcontract
$24,443. (Co-principal Investigator with Dr. H. Johnson, MSU).
U.S. Department of Education. “Preparing Special Education Faculty for Universities and
Colleges”. 2004-2007 Extended to 2008. Total funds $ 654,956. (Co-principal
Investigator with Drs. Umbreit and Ofiesh. Responsibility .20FTE)
U.S. Department of Education. “Longitudinal Study of Academic and Social Status of Deaf/Hard
of Hearing students attending general education classrooms in public schools”. 2001-
2006. Extended to December 2007. Total funds $884,109.
CATALANO 51
Recent In-service Workshops
Facilitating academic success for deaf and hard-of-hearing students in general education
classrooms. Presentation to the Arizona Chapter of Hands and Voices. Phoenix,
September 2008.
Academic and social status and progress of DHH students in general education. Presentation to
leadership group of the Arizona State Schools for Deaf and Blind. Tucson, September
2008. (with Dr. Kathryn Kreimeyer).
Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children in the public schools: School, family and student influences
on success. Conference of Educators of Deaf and Hard of Hearing, British Columbia:
Vancouver, British Columbia, October 2006.
Longitudinal Study of Academic and Social Status of D/HH Students in Public Schools: Factors
influencing progress. Arizona State Schools for Deaf and Blind, Statewide Conference
Tucson, Arizona: October 2005 (with Drs. Reed and Stryker and graduate students Sarah
Goins, Caroline Guardino and Denise Tarpley).
Deaf and Hard of hearing students in public schools: Who are they and how are they doing?
Arizona State Schools Statewide Inservice, Phoenix, Arizona: October 2004 (with Drs.
Reed, Stryker, and doctoral student Sarah Goins).
Recent Conference Presentations
Antia, S. D. (2008). No child (with hearing loss) left behind. Keynote paper presented at the 29th
Annual Conference on mainstreaming students with hearing loss. Northampton, MA.
Antia, S.D. (2008). Academic and social status and progress of DHH students in general
education. National Technical Institute for the Deaf. Rochester, NY.
Antia, S.D., (2008). Facilitators of academic success for DHH students in general education
classrooms. National Technical Institute for the Deaf. Rochester, NY.
Johnson, H. & Antia, S.D. (2008) A collaborative model for doctoral candidate preparation in
deaf education. Paper presented at the Association of College Educators: Deaf/Hard of
Hearing. Monterey CA.
Antia, S.D., & Kreimeyer, K.H. (2008). DHH students’ communication participation in general
education classrooms. Paper presented at the Association of College Educators:
Deaf/Hard of Hearing. Monterey CA.
Reed, S., Antia, S. D., & Kreimeyer, K., H. (2007). Longitudinal investigation of the academic
status of deaf and hard of hearing students in public schools: School, home and program
facilitators and detractors. Paper presented at the American Education Research
Association. Chicago IL.
Antia, S. D., & Reed, S. (2006). Longitudinal investigation of the academic and social status of
Deaf and Hard of Hearing students in public schools. Poster presented at the Office of
Special Education Programs: Project Director's Conference. Washington DC
Antia, S. D., Reed, S., Foster, S., & Cue, K. (2006). Developing curricula for itinerant teachers:
In pursuit of a moving target. Poster presented at the Association of College Educators-
Deaf/Hard of Hearing, Denver, Colorado.
Guardino, C., Goins, S., Antia, S.D., & Reed, S. (2006) Assessing Classroom Participation,
Social Behavior and Academic Competence. Poster presented at the Association of
College Educators-Deaf/Hard of Hearing, Denver, Colorado.
CATALANO 52
Antia, S.D. (2006) Factors influencing the Academic and Social integration of Deaf and Hard of
Hearing students in inclusive settings: Implications for Research and Practice. Plenary
Paper; International Congress: Deafness, Communication and Learning, Barcelona.
Spain.
Antia, S.D. & De Conde, J. (2005) Academic progress of Deaf and Hard of Hearing students in
public schools: Description and correlates of success. Paper presented at the
International Congress on Education of the Deaf, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Recent Professional Activities Editorial Board member: Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, Communication
Disorders Quarterly, Teaching Exceptional Children
Evaluator for Promotion and Tenure proposals: Georgia State University, 2002; University of
Melbourne 2004, 2005; University of Colorado, Boulder, 2007; Tel-Aviv University,
2007, Thessaly University 2013.
CATALANO 53
CURRENT AND PENDING SUPPORT OF SENIOR/KEY PERSONNEL
Current and pending grants are listed for the following senior/key personnel:
1. Jennifer Catalano, Principal Investigator
2. Shirin Antia, co-Principal Investigator
CATALANO 54
Jennifer Catalano, Principal Investigator
Grant Type Proportion of Time
(% effort/12-month calendar year)
Center on Literacy and Deafness current 19%/AY
Proposed Research Project
pending 65%/12-month calendar year
Total 84%/12-month calendar year
CATALANO 55
Shirin Antia, Co-Principal Investigator
Grant Type Proportion of Time
(% effort/12-month calendar year)
Center on Literacy and Deafness
current 27%/12-month calendar year
Personnel Preparation Grant
(Deaf Education)
current 15%/12-month calendar year
Proposed Research Project
pending 8%/12-month calendar year
Total 50%/12-month calendar year
CATALANO 56
NARRATIVE BUDGET JUSTIFICATION
Personnel
Principal Investigator/Project Director (.75 FTE-AY/1.0 FTE-one summer month).
Jennifer Catalano, M.A., Postdoctoral Researcher in the Department of Disability and
Psychoeducational Studies at the University of Arizona will receive 75% of her salary during the
academic year (9 months) for two years plus one month summer salary. Mrs. Catalano will
oversee all aspects of the project including budget oversight, completing reports for IES,
research design, recruitment of graduate research associates (GRAs), coding, data analysis, and
coordinating with senior/key personnel, student workers, and CLAD leadership. During year one
she will be responsible for organizing and preparing videos, setting up Interact© for coding,
piloting and refining the observation coding system to create a ‘gold standard’ for coding
reliability, hiring GRAs, and teaching them how to code classroom video observations using
Interact© and the observation coding systems. She will also code videos, manage interobserver
agreement, and analyze data with the support of the statistician. During the summer month, she
will begin to prepare the results for dissemination via presentations and publications. During year
two, Mrs. Catalano will conduct professional development workshops at school sites for DHH
students that include ongoing consultation and support for teachers, develop a web-based
classroom management module for teachers across the country, present at conferences in the
field of Deaf education, and compose manuscripts for publication in journals such as The
Journal for Deaf Studies and Deaf Education and The American Annals of the Deaf.
Co-Principal Investigator (.10 FTE-AY). Shirin Antia, Ph.D., Professor in the
Department of Disability and Psychoeducational Studies at the University of Arizona will
receive 10% of her salary during the academic year (9 months) for two years. Dr. Antia will
provide guidance and support to the PI throughout the duration of the project. She will
communicate with CLAD leadership. During year one, she will assist with research design,
recruitment of GRAs, and data analyses. During year two, she will assist in the dissemination of
the results via professional development workshops, presentations, and publications.
Research Collaborator (.15 FTE-AY/1.0 FTE-one summer month). Christina Rivera,
Ph.D., Adjunct Associate Professor in the Department of Disability and Psychoeducational
Studies at the University of Arizona will receive 15% of her salary during the academic year (9
months) for two years plus one month summer. Dr. Rivera will provide consultation as needed
throughout the course of the project. During year one, she will assist in the establishment of
reliability for the observational coding systems and preparation of graduate assistants for coding.
During the summer month, she will begin to prepare the results for dissemination via
presentations and publications. During year two, Dr. Rivera will assist in the implementation of
professional development workshops at school sites for DHH students that include ongoing
consultation and support for teachers, development of a web-based classroom management
module for teachers across the country, presentations at conferences in the field of Deaf
education, and composition of manuscripts for publication in journals such as The Journal for
Deaf Studies and Deaf Education and The American Annals of the Deaf.
Research Collaborator (.05 FTE-AY). Carol Buuck, M.A., Research Coordinator for
CLAD in the Department of Disability and Psychoeducational Studies at the University of
Arizona will receive 5% of her salary during the academic year (9 months) during the first year.
During year one, she will assist in the establishment of reliability for the observational coding
systems and preparation of graduate research associates for coding.
CATALANO 57
Graduate Research Associates (.50 FTE-AY/.50 FTE-1 summer month). Two GRAs
will be hired by the PI and will receive 50% of their salary (equivalent to 20 hours per week)
plus graduate tuition remission during the first year and one summer month. During year one, the
graduate associates will assist with coding. During the summer month, they will assist with the
preparation of descriptive and correlational results for presentations and publications.
Fringe Benefits. The established rates for employee benefits are 34.7% for University of
Arizona employees and 13.9% for graduate associates.
Operations
Technology. The following equipment and software will be purchased for use during
year one:
1. Interact© professional software for behavioral research by Mangold International
2. Seagate external hard drives (3)
3. Software protection dongles or flash drives (3)
4. Lenovo Z51 laptop computers (2)
5. Dell 20-inch computer monitors (3)
6. VicTsing VGA to HDMI output connective hardware (3)
7. SPSS Statistics software by IBM
Interact© is the software that is currently being used by CLAD to complete coding of
classroom video observations. The purchase of this software is essential for the completion of
this project. Three sets of external hard drives will be needed to store videos for the three coders.
First, the hard drives will be used by the PI and the two research collaborators for purposes of
establishing reliability and a ‘gold standard’ for coding. Next, the three hard drives will be used
by the PI and the two GRAs for coding and interobserver agreement. The three software
protection dongles will enable Interact© to work in conjunction with the external hard drives.
Two laptop computers will be purchased for use by the GRAs for coding. The PI and the
research collaborators will use the computers that they already have. Three additional monitors
will enable the coders to simultaneously watch the classroom videos and the Interact© coding
screen. The VGA to HDMI output connective hardware is needed to connect the coders’ laptops
to their additional computer monitors. Finally, one copy of the most current version of SPSS
Statistics software will be needed to perform statistical operations for purposes of analyzing the
results.
Travel
Domestic. During both years of the project, Mrs. Catalano, PI, and Dr. Rivera, Research
Collaborator, will travel to two national conferences: Association of College Educators-Deaf and
Hard of Hearing (ACE-DHH) conferences in February and the Council for Exceptional Children
(CEC) conferences in April. During the first year, the researchers will provide updates on the
progress of the study. During the second year, the researchers will present project results and
updates on the dissemination of results with teachers. Travel costs include economy airfare, per
diem, and hotel stay.
Local. During year two of the project, mileage reimbursement will be given to research
team members traveling to the Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and Blind in Tucson and the
Phoenix Day School for the Deaf located in Phoenix for purposes of classroom management
professional development approximately one time per month.
Indirect Costs
The University of Arizona has negotiated an Indirect Cost Rate of 53.5% MTDC for
Organized Research-On Campus.
top related