Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Articles/Articoli

Vol. 12 No. 2 (2021): Evaluation, feedback, equity: a challenge in education

Tools and approaches for assessing the communication skills of students with Autism Spectrum Disorder

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/ess2-2021oa12483
Submitted
settembre 7, 2021
Published
2021-12-21

Abstract

When there are students with Autism Spectrum Disorder or with complex communication needs, the evaluation process is the result of an interplay between the different social actors involved in the co-planning of the educational and didactic path. The team is also involved in detecting pupil’s abilities and identifying barriers and facilitators within the context. The aim of this work is to identify evaluative and self-evaluative tools that can facilitate learning, also from a metacognitive perspective, with particular attention to the Augmentative Alternative Communication (AAC) approach. In the educational field, it aims to acquire ex ante information on knowledge, skills and competences, but also to monitor the teaching-learning process and the degree of involvement and participation of students in teaching activities.

References

  1. Allen D.W. (1967). Microteaching: a description. California, CA: Stanford University.
  2. Babb S., McNaughton D., Light J., Caron J., Wydner K., Jung S. (2020). Using AAC video visual scene displays to increase participation and communication within a volunteer activity for adolescents with complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 36(1), 31-42.
  3. Bandura A. (1997), Self-efficacy. The exercise of control, New York, W.H. Freeman.
  4. Bandura A. (1977). Social learning theory. Oxford, England: Prentice-Hall.
  5. Bellini S., Akullian J. (2007). A Meta-Analysis of Video Modeling and Video Self-Modeling Interventions for Children and Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Exceptional Children, 73(3), 264-287.
  6. Beukelman D. R., Mirenda P. (2014). Manuale di Comunicazione Aumentativa e Al-ternativa. Interventi per bambini ed adulti con complessi bisogni comunicativi. Trento: Erickson.
  7. Beukelman D.R., Ray P. (2010). Communication supports in pediatric rehabilitation. Journal of Pediatric Rehabilitation Medicine, 3(4): 279-288, DOI: 10.3233/prm-2010-0139.
  8. Black P. (1998). Testing: Friend or Foe. Theory and Practice of Assessment and Testing. New York: Routledge Falmer.
  9. Black, P., Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability (formerly: Journal of Person-nel Evaluation in Education), 21(1): 5-31.
  10. Bloom B. S., Madaus G. F. and Hastings J. T. (1971). Handbook on Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  11. Boud D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in continuing education, 22(2): 151-167, Doi: 10.1080/713695728.
  12. Cafiero J. M. (2009). Comunicazione aumentativa e alternativa. Strumenti e strategie per l'autismo e i deficit di comunicazione. Trento: Erickson.
  13. Calvani A., Bonaiuti G. and Andreocci B. (2014). Il microteaching rinascerà a nuova vita? Video annotazione e sviluppo della riflessività del docente. Italian Journal of Educational Research, 4(6): 29-42.
  14. Capperucci D. (a cura di) (2011). La valutazione degli apprendimenti in ambito scolastico. Promuovere il successo formativo a partire dalla valutazione. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  15. Corbett B. A., Abdullah, M. (2005). Video modeling: Why does it work for children with autism?. Journal of Early and Intensive Behavior Intervention, 2(1): 2.
  16. Cottini L. (2016). L’autodeterminazione nelle persone con disabilità. Percorsi educativi per svilupparla. Trento: Erickson.
  17. Cottini, L. (2017). Didattica speciale e inclusione scolastica. Roma: Carocci Editore.
  18. Cottini L., Bonci B. (2016). L’insegnamento di abilità di autonomia attraverso un programma di video modeling e di video self-modeling. Giornale italiano dei disturbi del neurosviluppo, pp. 83-95.
  19. Curry S. K., Robinson N.B. (2010). Assistive Technology for Young Children. Baltimora: Paul Brookes Publishing.
  20. Fäldt A., Fabian H., Thunberg G. and Lucas S. (2020). “All of a sudden we noticed a difference at home too”: parents’ perception of a parent-focused early communi-cation and AAC intervention for toddlers. AAC: Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 36(3): 143-154. Doi: 10.1080/07434618.2020.1811757.
  21. Felisatti E. (2013). Il laboratorio di Microteaching nel Tirocinio OnLine per la formazione iniziale degli insegnanti. Form@re - Open Journal per La Formazione in Rete, 12(79): 64-70. Doi: 10.13128/formare-12602.
  22. Galliani L. (2019). Tecnologie e valutazione: bio-bibliografia di un intreccio, Giornale Italiano della Ricerca Educativa, 9744: 101-114. Doi: 10.7346/SIRD-1S2019-P101.
  23. Gardner J. (2013). Assessment and Learning. London: Sage.
  24. Giaconi C. (2015). Qualità della vita e adulti con disabilità. Percorsi di ricerca e prospettive inclusive. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  25. Gison G., Vallefuoco E. and Pepino A. (2019). Piattaforma digitale per la progettazione degli interventi nel disturbo dello spettro autistico SUPER (Sistema Unitario in una Piattaforma Educativa e Riabilitativa). Il TNPE. Disponibile su: https://rivistedigitali.erickson.it/il-tnpee/archivio/vol-1-n-1/piattaforma-digitale-per-la-progettazione-degli-interventi-nel-disturbo-dello-spettro-autistico-super-sistema-unitario-in-una-piattaforma-educativa-e-riabilitativa.
  26. Goldaman H. (2006). VCAA. Valutazione della comunicazione aumentativa e alternativa. Trento: Erickson.
  27. Gronlund N. E., Waugh C. K. (2008). Assessment of Student Achievement. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
  28. Harlen W. (2007). Assessment of Learning. London: Sage Publications.
  29. Hattie J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.
  30. Hewitt M., Nye-Lengerman (2019). Community Living and Participation for People With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. Washington: AAIDD.
  31. Ianes D. (2016). La valutazione iniziale delle abilità nell’alunno con disabilità. Schede operative per l’insegnante. Trento: Erickson.
  32. Keeffe L. O., Rosa A., Vannini I. and White B. (2020). Promote informal formative assessment practices in higher education: the potential of video analysis as a training tool. Open Journal per La Formazione in Rete, 20(1): 43-61.
  33. Keith K., Keith H. (2020). Lives and Legacies of People with Intellectual Disability. Washington: AAIDD.
  34. Koegel L. K., Ashbaugh K. (2017). Communication and autism spectrum disorder. In Curricula for teaching students with autism spectrum disorder (pp. 47-70). Cham: Springer.
  35. Lambert D., Lines D. (2000). Understanding Assessment. London: Routledge Falmer.
  36. Maione L., Mirenda P. (2006). Effects of Video Modeling and Video Feedback on Peer-Directed Social Language Skills of a Child With Autism Liana Maione Centre for Early Autism Treatment. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 8.
  37. Mangione G. R., Rosa A. (2017). Professional vision e il peer to peer nel percorso Neoassunti. L’uso del video per l’analisi della pratica del docente in classe. Form@re - Open Journal per La Formazione in Rete, 1. Doi: 10.13128/formare-20269.
  38. Perla L., Vinci V. (2021). Videovalutare l’agire competente dello studente. Excellence and Innovation in Learning and Teaching, 1: 119-135. Doi: 10.3280/exioa1-2021oa12075.
  39. Pickles A., Le Couteur A., Leadbitter K., Salomone E., Cole- Fletcher R., Tobin H. and Aldred, C. (2016). Parent-mediated social communication therapy for young children with autism (PACT): Long-term follow-up of a randomised controlled trial. The Lancet, 388(10059): 2501-2509.
  40. Qi C. H., Barton E. E., Collier M. and Lin Y. L. (2018). A systematic review of single-case research studies on using video modeling interventions to improve social communication skills for individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 33(4): 249-257.
  41. Rivarola A. (2014). Prefazione all’edizione italiana. In: Beukelman D.R. e Mirenda P., Manuale di Comunicazione Aumentativa e Alternativa. Interventi per bambini e adulti con complessi bisogni comunicativi. Trento: Erickson.
  42. Rossi P. G., Ranieri M., Li Y. and Perifanou M. (2019). Interaction, feedback and active learning : where we are and where we want to go. Form@re - Open Journal Per La Formazione in Rete, 19(3): 1-5. Doi: 10.13128/form-769619.
  43. Sambell K., Brown S. and Beckett L. (2019). Assessment as a locus for engagement: priorities and practicalities, Italian Journal of Educational Research, Maggio, XII: 45-61.
  44. Sambell K., McDowell L. and Montgomery C. (2013). Assessment for Learning in Higher Education. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
  45. Santagata R., Zannoni C. and Stigler J. W. (2007). The role of lesson analysis in pre-service teacher education: An empirical investigation of teacher learning from a virtual video-based field experience. Journal of mathematics teacher education, 10(2): 123-140.
  46. Schlosser R., Lee O. (2000). Promoting generalization and maintenance in augmentative and alternative communication: A meta-analysis of 20 years of effectiveness research. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16: 208-227.
  47. Schlosser R., McGhie-Richmond D., Blackstein-Adler S., Mirenda P., Antonius K. and Janzen P. (2000). Training a school team to integrate technology meaningfully into the curriculum: Effects on student participation. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15: 31-44.
  48. Sevcik R., Romski M. A. (2002). The role of language comprehension in establishing early augmented conversations. In: Reichle J., Beukelman D.R. e Light J. (Eds.), Implementing an augmentative communication system: Exemplary strategies for beginning communicators. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
  49. Sherin M. G. (2014). Developing a professional vision of classroom events. In Beyond classical pedagogy (pp. 89-108). UK: Routledge.
  50. Sherin M. G., Russ R. S., Sherin B. L. and Colestock A. (2008). Professional Vision in Action: An Exploratory Study. Issues in Teacher Education, 17(2): 27-46.
  51. Sibilio M. (2020). L’interazione didattica. Brescia: Scholé.
  52. Sigafoos J., Kelly M. A. and Butterfield N. (2007). Migliorare la comunicazione quotidiana dei bambini disabili. Trento: Erickson.
  53. Tagavi, D., Koegel, L., Koegel, R. and Vernon, T. (2020). Improving Conversational fluidity in young adults with autism spectrum disorder using a video-feedback In-tervention. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. Doi: 10.1177/1098300720939969.
  54. Tomasello M. (2009). Le origini della comunicazione umana. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editori.
  55. Valeri G., Marotta L. (a cura di) (2014). Disturbi della comunicazione. Dalla valuta-zione al trattamento. Trento: Erickson.
  56. Vivanet G. (2015). L’uso della video osservazione nella formazione degli insegnanti: Una indagine preliminare. Mondo Digitale, 14(58): 29-42.
  57. Waugh C. K., Gronlund N. E. (2013). Assessment of Student Achievement. New York: Pearson.
  58. Wert B. Y., Neisworth J. T. (2003). Effects of Video Self-Modeling on Spontaneous Requesting in Children with Autism. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 5(1): 30-34. Doi: 10.1177/10983007030050010501.
  59. World Health Organization (WHO) (2007). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health – Children & Youth Version. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO.
  60. Zabala J. (2005). Ready, SETT, go! Getting Started with the SETT Framework. Clos-ing the gap, 23(6).
  61. Zabala J., Bowser G. and Korsten J. (2005). SETT and Re-SETT: Concepts for AT implementation, go! Getting Started with the SETT Framework. Closing the gap, 23(5).

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...