Project NEST: An Early Intervention Practicum in Natural Environments Michelle Gatmaitan, M.Ed & Sanna Harjusola-Webb, Ph.D.

Practicum and Evaluation Procedures

Conceptual Model for NEST

Practical Implications & Future Directions

Introduction

Significance •  Researchers have reported inadequate personnel preparation in EI (Chang, Early, & Winton, 2005; Bruder et al., 2009) •  Most training for infant/toddler professionals occurs on the job (Campbell & Milbourne, 2005) •  EI professionals are working in settings and situations that require skills for which they were not trained (Winton & McCollum, 2008). •  Historically, EI professionals have been more adequately trained to work with children, not adults (Winton & McCollum, 2008). •  Student teachers need direct opportunities to learn and apply skills (Macy & Squires, 2009)

Previous Research on Preservice Preparation in EI: Elements of the Practicum Experience •  Authentic, meaningful field-based activities that are modeled after the professional requirements of individuals when they are employed (Macy, Squires, & Barton, 2009), •  Prolonged engagement and relationship-building with children and families (Mandell & Murray, 2005) •  Specific observable competencies for assessment of student progress (Malone & Straka, 2005; Squires, 1995) •  Individualized learning plans (Malone, 2008) •  Mentoring and reflective supervision (Clifford et al., 2005; Macy et al., 2009).

Progression of Learning

Practicum Seminar Content • Seminar meetings took place bimonthly. • Seminars were structured with:

o  “Grand Rounds” discussions of students sharing their practicum experiences and problem-solving collaboratively o  Discussions of EI principles, best practices, and application

•  Topics were delivered in the following sequence: 1.  Natural Environments Key Principles and Practices 2.  Home Visiting 3.  Team Models in EI 4.  Assessment (Child and Family) 5.  Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) Development 6.  IFSP Implementation and Progress Monitoring 7.  Coaching Parents and Caregivers

Practicum Activities 1.  Student self-assessment (competencies, pre and post) 2.  Individual Professional Development Plans 3.  Reflective journaling (blog format) 4.  Home and community-based visits 5.  EI team meeting observation and participation 6.  Multi-step project with selected family (video-recorded visits)

a)   Assessment (Routines-Based Interview, McWilliam et al., 2009; Hawaii Early Learning Profile; Parks, 1992)

b)  IFSP Development (functional outcomes and strategies) c)   IFSP Implementation & Progress Monitoring (with caregiver

coaching) 7.  Coaching meetings between university supervisor and student 8.  Practicum portfolios or electronic (online) portfolios

Evaluation Questions 1.  Did students gain competencies in EI after the practicum? 2.  Were students satisfied with their learning and the supervision they

received in the practicum? 3.  Were supervisors satisfied with student learning in the practicum? Evaluation Procedures •  Early Intervention Specialist Competency Self-Assessment •  Student project evaluations (rated by Field Supervisor) •  Practicum fidelity checklist (completed by University Supervisor) •  Coaching fidelity checklist for supervision (University Supervisor) •  Student interviews •  Supervisor interviews Participants: 4 graduate students, 4 field supervisors

COMPETENCIES: Natural

Environments Key Principles

AUTHENTIC, EXPERIENTIAL

ACTIVITIES SUPERVISION

Evaluation Results

Natural Environments Key Principle (scale: 1-5) Student A Student B Student C Student D Mean diff

(OSEP Workgroup on Principles and Practices in Natural Environments, 2007, 2008)

Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post

1. Infants & toddlers learn best through everyday experiences & interactions with familiar people in familiar contexts.

3.00 4.83 2.17 4.33 3.00 4.83 3.00 4.00 1.71

2. All families, with the necessary supports & resources, can enhance their children’s learning & development.

2.83 5.00 3.00 4.67 3.00 4.67 3.00 4.00 1.63

3. The primary role of a service provider in early intervention is to work with & support family members & caregivers in children’s lives.

3.14 5.00 1.71 4.43 2.86 4.57 2.71 3.71 1.82

4. The early intervention process, from initial contacts through transition, must be dynamic & individualized to reflect the child’s & family members’ preferences, learning styles, & cultural beliefs.

3.00 5.00 2.86 4.25 2.63 4.25 1.63 2.50 1.47

5. IFSP outcomes must be functional & based on children’s & families’ needs & family-identified priorities.

3.25 5.00 2.50 4.88 2.25 4.50 2.13 3.00 1.81

6. The family’s priorities, needs, & interests are addressed most appropriately by a primary provider who represents & receives team & community support.

3.25 4.63 2.00 4.13 3.00 4.88 1.50 2.25 1.54

7. Interventions with young children & family members must be based on explicit principles, validated practices, best available research, & relevant laws & regulations.

3.25 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.25 4.00 2.00 2.75 1.56

1 • New Learning

2 • Mechanical Use

3 • Routine Use

4 • Refinement

5 •  Integration

6 •  Innovation

(Gingiss, 1992)

Student Interviews (Post-Practicum) • “I felt like a professional.” “The practicum built on everything we had talked about in coursework.” •  “After the practicum, I feel like I could take on that role and do that job.” •  “I would like to learn more about behavior management… and how to coach parents to do that.”

Field Supervisor Interviews (Post-Practicum) •  “My student was exemplary... She devoted a lot of time to her work and it was a good learning experience.” •  “It was helpful to have a fresh set of eyes [from practicum students] during home visits.” •  “The practicum wasn’t just about accumulating hours but doing actual projects.” •  “It was a good experience for me to give feedback to students.” •  “Students in EI need to know how to be flexible in this job.” (key disposition) •  “International students may need more support in understanding ‘unwritten protocols’ about working in this culture.”

Main Findings •  Please interpret results with caution due to the small sample size. •  Overall, students competency ratings across the seven Key Principles increased at the end of the practicum. •  Highest increases were in Key Principles 3 and 5 (average increase of 1.82; 1.81 from pre- to post-measure). •  Lowest increases were in Key Principles 4 and 6 (average increase 1.47, 1.54 from pre- to post-measure). •  Field supervisors also rated competencies 4 or higher on students’ Assessment and IFSP projects.

•  The current project is a small-scale, pilot project that outlines the development, implementation, and evaluation of a practicum that prepared students to work in Early Intervention (EI)/Part C settings. •  The practicum program, or Natural Environments Specialization Training (NEST) was designed according to the Agreed Upon Mission and Key Principles of Early Intervention in Natural Environments (OSEP Workgroup on Principles and Practices in Natural Environments, 2007, 2008). • The practicum was implemented collaboratively with a local EI agency that provides services to families of Part C-eligible infants and toddlers in natural environments.

Practical Implications •  The practicum gave students multiple opportunities to acquire, practice, and refine skills through participation in authentic field activities (rather than passive observation or mere “shadowing”) •  Time and scheduling remain a challenge for all participants. •  University-EI agency partnership is essential for the practicum.

Future Directions •  Compare field supervisor ratings on student competencies with students’ self-assessments of their competencies •  Examine which competency areas are in need of increased support •  Develop measure for coding behaviors that demonstrate Natural Environments Key Principles in students’ home visit videos •  Conduct interviews with parents/caregivers who interacted with students in the practicum •  Record video of coaching sessions between students and university supervisor for coding of supervision behaviors

University-EI Agency Partnership

Practicum Supervision

Role of Field Supervisor (EI Professional) •  Supervised students’ field activities •  Provided modeling, feedback, evaluation, and support

Role of University Supervisor: •  Collaborated with liaison from EI agency •  Developed EI Practicum Handbook and evaluations •  Developed content and facilitated seminar meetings •  Viewed student videos of home visiting activities •  Provided coaching and support to students (after each video observation)

Coaching Cycle (Hanft, Rush, & Shelden, 2004)

Initiation

Observation

Action Reflection

Feedback