Teachers’ Corner

Why teachers need to play to provide the best UDL supports when teaching STEM

Angi Stone-MacDonald, PhDUniversity of Massachusetts Boston

In early childhood and elementary classrooms across the coun-try, Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) ac-tivities are the daily routines, but it is likely that the focus is more on science and math. Engineering is often left out, not because teachers do not believe that it is important, but because many teachers are uncomfortable with or scared of engineer-ing and STEM in general (Adams, Miller, Saul, & Pegg, 2014; Sharapan, 2012; Stone-MacDonald, Bartolini, Douglass, & Love, 2011). As a teacher educator, I see this fear and reticence in my university classes preparing educators to teach STEM in inclusive settings. Many even think I am a little weird, because on the first day of class I am excited to get to the engineer-ing section and do the fun exercises. During the engineering classes, pre-service educators practice the various activities and get to play themselves. They realize that it is not only fun but also that they know so much more about engineering and how to support students in learning the various integrated STEM concepts through engineering experiences or investigations than they realized. Because we did the engineering investiga-tions in class and discussed UDL supports and more intensive accommodations for various students and their needs, they are better prepared to plan UDL supports that lead to meaningful participation by all students in investigations, resulting in im-proved student outcomes on STEM standards.

Experiential learning benefits all children by providing hands-on learning activities (Council, 2018; Cunningham, Lachapelle, & Davis, 2018; McClure et al., 2017). As special educators, we know that all children should have access to high quality STEM experiences and hands-on learning. UDL prin-ciples help teachers plan meaningful ways to actively engage all children—including those with developmental disabilities and autism—to participate in hands-on learning experiences to increase their problem-solving skills (Butera, Horn, Palmer, Friesen, & Lieber, 2016; CAST, 2012; Stone-MacDonald, Wendell, Douglass, & Love, 2015). Students with developmen-tal disabilities may need more intensive interventions or strate-gies for success in an inclusive classroom. Some studies have

shown that peer-mediated instruction and task analysis support teaching inquiry-based science to students with severe disabili-ties (Courtade, Browder, Spooner, & DiBiase, 2010; Jimenez, Browder, Spooner, & Dibiase, 2012).

Engineering in the ClassroomWhen engineering educators talk about engineering design practices, they are referring to ways of thinking and acting that are typical of adult engineers and that are productive for ac-complishing engineering tasks (NRC, 2012). In the work that I have done with colleagues around inclusive engineering expe-riences for young children, children and adults work together through four phases of engineering design that are appropriate for young children. These phases are 1) Think about it, 2) Try it, 3) Fix it, and 4) Share it (Stone-MacDonald et al., 2015). This engineering process is designed to promote emergent en-gineering thinking and problem solving. While students with disabilities or younger students might never do more than one or two of these phases in a single lesson, through the course of a full engineering experience or investigation, students and adults would complete all four phases to solve their problem and develop more questions for the next investigation. Hands-on engineering or STEM experiences—because engineering expe-riences often use most or all of the areas of STEM—use both open exploration and focused investigations. An open explora-tion provides initial experiences with the relevant science that build a foundation. In an open exploration, students are pro-vided the materials with which to play and become familiar, and can explore them and try different activities or pose their own questions. Focused investigations start with specific questions to answer or problems to solve, usually generated by the students from open explorations.

Balls and RampsWhen I teach pre-service educators in my university classes, I bring in the balls and ramps and require that my students play and experience the activity just as their students would. In my college classroom and in many professional development train-ings I have done, we use balls and ramps as an engineering ex-perience to model open and focused explorations and to plan for students with disabilities. First, the teachers get to try the different balls and ramps, and see how they work. They then de-velop 5–10 questions they want to potentially explore as part of a focused investigation. These questions might include: Which ball goes faster? Which ramp is steeper? Does the width of the ramp matter? What makes a ball move slower?

The purpose of having the educators do the investigations is not just to help them become more comfortable with the materials and the activity, but also to help them think through

(continued on page 6)

Volume 30, Number 2 • Spring 2019

Focusing on individuals with autism, intellectual disability, and related disabilitiesA publication of the DIVISION ON AUTISM AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES, a unit of the Council for Exceptional Children

ExpressExpress

DADD Express2

President’s MessageMichael Wehmeyer

Greetings to all DADD members from cold, blustery Kansas. I definitely miss the weather we had in Maui for the DADD 2019 conference!

Speaking of Maui, once again we had a great conference. There were almost 400 attendees, with 168 poster presentations and 99 workshops. Our thanks to Cindy Perras, the DADD conference coordinator, for all of her work and to all of you who took the time to contribute via sessions and posters or who were there to network and learn. Keep in mind that the next DADD conference will be held from January 22–24, 2020, in Sarasota, Florida. Put those dates on your calendar now and watch for more information in the future. We held our annual DADD board of directors meetings and the division’s business meeting in Maui during the week. Among the important pieces of business that were wrapped up during that time was a revision and update of the division’s bylaws. This was an effort of the entire board, but I want to particularly thank Dianne Zager, David Cihak, and Elizabeth West for initiating these conversations during their presidential terms and Jor-dan Shurr, who chaired the task force that finalized all of the changes to the bylaws during his presidential year. Assisting Jordan on the task force were Teresa Taber Doughty, Ginevra (continued on page 6)

Courtade, and Cindy Perras. The bylaws revisions were emailed to the membership earlier in the spring and passed unanimously.

Two weeks after the sunny, warm climate of Maui, many of us were together again in not-as-warm Indianapolis for the CEC International Conference. Thirty-four poster presenta-tions and 37 workshops or panel sessions were presented in the autism and developmental disability strand. One of our pri-orities for this year (and in the future) is to enhance diversity within the DADD membership and to support similar efforts within the field of special education itself. We kicked off these efforts with a roundtable discussion held at the DADD con-ference in Maui and then made that the topic of the DADD showcase session at CEC in Indianapolis. Both sessions pro-vided information and opportunities for input and put us on stronger footing to move forward with this important initiative. My thanks to Elizabeth Harkins, Gloria Niles, Ruth Eyres, and Amrita Chaturvedi for coordinating and presenting in one or both sessions. We welcome suggestions, recommendations, and volunteers to continue this important work. We also had well-attended screenings of the film Intelligent Lives at both confer-ences, with one of the stars of the film, Micah Fialka-Feldman, presenting the opening keynote in Maui, while filmmaker Dan Habib hosted a standing-room-only screening in Indianapolis, which was followed by a discussion panel featuring people with intellectual disability and a parent (our own Cindy Perras).

A few years ago, I moved from the role of a university professor to that of a university administrator. I now serve as a dean for a College of Education that leaves me with less time than ever to engage in professional activities, research pursuits, and brainstorming conversations with my special education colleagues to generate ideas for exciting new projects, much less anything that is recreational. Until recently, I’ve found that I need to schedule time to do things like laundry, grocery shopping, cooking a meal, or just to watch the evening news. When I’m not working, I’m sleeping and dreaming about how to solve tomorrow’s problems in the office. It’s exhausting!

About six months ago in my exhaustion, I had a random memory from my teaching days about the importance of lei-sure—when I used to teach leisure skills in my classroom—and the fact that it seems to be missing from my current life! Like an epiphany, I remembered that leisure is a critical element of self-care and one in which everyone should engage. It is the use of free time that is also described as “breathing space, re-spite, and relief,” adjectives that were almost nonexistent in my life. Merriam-Webster (n.d.) identifies leisure as “decompres-sion, ease, relaxation, repose, and rest.” In general, regularly engaging in leisure activities contributes to improved health,

Executive Director’s CornerTeresa Taber Doughty

increased physical activity, and reduced stress. And while being fun, leisure has many additional life benefits.

Improved health and stress reduction are two major ben-efits of engaging in leisure activities and is applicable to every-one, including those with and without a disability. According to the National Center on Health, Physical Activity and Disability (www.nchpad.org), engaging in leisure gives individuals a sense of purpose, allows for the development of many different kinds of skills (e.g., physical, cognitive, artistic, social), promotes in-dependence and a sense of competence as individuals choose to participate in those activities they enjoy, and empowers people to decide for themselves what is worth doing. In general, these are life skills and directly related to improved quality of life.

Leisure activities can range from those that can be done alone—such as reading, photography, and playing on the computer—to those done with others, such as ballroom dancing, playing board games, and simply having a conversation. The list is endless. And for many individuals with disabilities, exposure to and instruction in leisure skills can open doors to opportunities for inclusion in the community, and thus should be a focus of the school curriculum.

For me, I’ve had to be purposeful in adding leisure back into my routine. I’ve come to realize that if I don’t take time to decompress and have some breathing space, my ability to think clearly and to problem-solve (and with a good attitude) suffers. I am no good to anyone else if I’m not taking care of myself first. I’ve begun to add “me” time to my routine. Everyone should have the ability to do so! ◼

DADD Express 3

(continued on page 4)

Evidence-based Practices for Treatment of StereotypyTips for Addressing Stereotypic Behavior

Stereotypic behavior often involves repetition and inflexibility that can interfere with learning (Cunningham & Schreibman, 2008). Forms of stereotypic behavior may include fixation on parts of objects or engagement in rituals. Stereotypy can be found in individuals with or without disabilities (MacDonald et al., 2007). However, problematic stereotypy is more often seen in individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and developmental disabilities (Cunningham & Schreibman, 2008). This article defines stereotypy, presents evidence-based practices for treating stereotypy, and provides examples of possible solutions to address stereotypies.

What is Stereotypy? The term stereotypy is used to classify repetitive behavior that does not appear to serve an adaptive function. Stereotypy is also known as self-stimulatory behavior or “stimming” due to the individual engaging in sensory input. Common examples of ste-reotypy are hand flapping, body rocking, spinning objects, im-mediate and delayed echolalia, and running objects across one’s peripheral vision (McLaughlin & Fleury, 2018). More complex stereotypy may include fixation on routines or parts of objects. For example, a child may line up objects or become fixated on the

wheels of a car (Cunningham & Schreibman, 2008). Additional types of stereotypies include vocal stereotypy, defined as any in-stance of contextually unrelated speech (Ahearn, Clark, Mac-Donald, & Chung, 2007). Since stereotypy may be maintained by automatic reinforcement, it can become problematic in finding a replacement behavior with the same reinforcing quality.

Addressing StereotypyDetermining when to address stereotypy can be challenging, as some stereotypic behaviors can decrease with skill acquisition. However, if stereotypy is interfering with learning, or results in social isolation or disruption, the teacher should develop a plan to decrease the behavior (Sheehey & Wells, 2018).

Evidence-Based Interventions Fortunately, there are evidence-based practices that can be implemented to reduce interfering stereotypic behavior. Lanovaz and Sladeczek (2012) report that there are both antecedent and consequence-based interventions that are effective in treating stereotypy. Table 1 provides an overview of the identified evidence-based practices.

C. Heather Whittemore, Ed.S. Kids for the Future Marianna, Arkansas

Kashena Ross, B.A. Kids for the Future Helena, Arkansas

Laura Beth Felton, Ed.S. Great Rivers Cooperative

Helena, Arkansas

Peggy J. Schaefer Whitby, Ph.D. University of Arkansas Fayetteville, Arkansas

Table 1. Evidence-Based Practices

Practice Definition ExampleEnvironmental modification

Modification of environment to decrease interfering behavior by increasing engagement in appropriate activities (Odom, Collet-Klingenberg, Rogers, & Hatton, 2010).

The teacher embeds three preferred activities within the 15–minute circle time activity to keep students on task.

Differential reinforcement

Reinforcement on alternative or low rates of behavior as a means to replace interfering behavior (Odom et al., 2010).

During circle time, a teacher reinforces holding a book or object instead of hand flapping. Once a rate of vocal stereotypy is determined, teacher provides reinforcement every 5 minutes when the child demonstrates a reduced rate in stereotypy.

Non-contingent reinforcement using matched or unmatched stimuli

Access to reinforcing stimuli based on a time schedule or continuously.

Reinforcing stimuli can match the stereotypic behavior.

Reinforcing stimuli can be unmatched, but should be preferred and a reinforcer for the child (Lanovaz & Sladeczek, 2012).

A student engages in vocal stereotypy. The teacher provides access to preferred songs throughout the day. Delivery is based on the number of minutes without vocal utterances.

A student engages in motor stereotypy (e.g., running/jumping). Access is provided to a preferred toy based on the specific duration of time unengaged in the stereotypic behavior.

Response redirection

Blocking of behavior with redirection to more incompatible behavior (Odom et al., 2010).

When a student begins vocal stereotypy, the teacher asks the student, “What is your name?” If the student responds, praise and redirection are provided. Student’s behavior is reinforced for participating in the task.

DADD Express4

(Evidence-based Practices, continued from page 3)

Environmental modifications are the least intrusive and re-quire observation as the first step. Students often demonstrate stereotypy when they are not engaged in reinforcing activities. Environmental changes should be made that limit the amount of time the child is unengaged. If the stereotypy continues to in-terfere with learning, a Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA) should be conducted.

Along with self-stimulation, stereotypy can be multi-controlled as the student learns the behavior can function as a form of escape and attention (Cunningham & Schreibman, 2008). After an FBA is conducted, interventions should be developed that address the needs of the student. If multiple functions are identified, separate intervention plans may be needed. Factors that influence intervention type include context of the environment and student characteristics.

Once an intervention is implemented, data is collected to monitor the effectiveness of the intervention. Table 2 provides examples of teacher concerns and possible solutions.

ConclusionFor children with developmental disabilities and ASD, stereotypic behavior may occur at higher rates and can become problematic. If this occurs, an effective intervention plan should be developed and implemented. If stereotypy interferes with learning and/or socialization, or is dangerous, teachers need to conduct an FBA and develop and implement effective intervention plans (McLaughlin & Fluery, 2018). Since stereotypy can be difficult to address, teachers should seek

assistance from and consult with a board-certified behavior analyst for additional support. ◼ReferencesAhearn, W. H., Clark, K. M., Macdonald, R. P., & Chung, B. I. (2007).

Assessing and treating vocal stereotypy in children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40(2), 263–275. doi:10.1901/jaba.2007.30-06

Cunningham, A. B., & Schreibman, L. (2008). Stereotypy in autism: The importance of function. Research in Autism Spectrum Disor-ders, 2(3), 469–479. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2007.09.006

Lanovaz, M. J., & Sladeczek, I. E. (2012). Vocal stereotypy in individuals with autism spectrum disorders: A review of the literature. Behav-ior Modification, 36(2), 146–164. doi: 10.1177/0145445511427192

MacDonald, R., Green, G., Mansfield, R., Geckeler, A., Gardenier, N., Anderson, J., . . . Sanchez, J. (2007). Stereotypy in young children with autism and typically developing children. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 28, 266–277.

Mclaughlin, A. & Fleury, V. P. (2018). Flapping, spinning, rocking, and other repetitive behaviors: Intervening with young children who engage in stereotypy. Young Exceptional Children, online first, doi:109625061879833.

Odom, S., Collet-Klingenberg, L., Rogers, S. J., & Hatton, D. D. (2010). Evidence-based practices in interventions for children and youth with autism spectrum disorders. Preventing School Fail-ure, 54(4), 275–282. doi: 10.1080/10459881003785506.

Sheehey, P. H., & Wells, J. C. (2018). Using response interruption and redirection to reduce vocal stereotypy. Intervention in School and Clinic, 53(3), 171–176. doi: 10.1177/1053451216659470

Table 2. Teacher Concerns and Possible Solutions

Teacher Concern Justification Suggested InterventionsDemonstrates stereotypy Behavior interferes with learning,

socialization or becomes dangerous.Upon observation, determine if environmental modifications can be made to increase time on task and decrease “down time.”

Demonstrates high levels of stereotypy

Stereotypy shaped into escape/attention-seeking behaviors.

Conduct a functional assessment for intervention (Cunningham & Schreibman, 2008).

Demonstrates either/both vocal or motor stereotypy

Engages in multiple types of stereotypy. If the child has a vocal or motor response under stimulus control, use Response Interruption and Redirection (RIRD).

No vocal responses under stimulus control

Early learner with no vocal imitation. Use a motor response to block the vocal stereotypy if the child has a motor response under stimulus control.

No motor or vocal responses under stimulus control

Early learner with no acquired motor/vocal imitation.

Use non-contingent reinforcement (NCR) with matched/ unmatched stimuli.

Difficulty delivering NCR in applied classroom setting

Staff has many responsibilities and forgets to deliver the NCR.

Use a timer to prompt staff. Start with a high level of scheduled NCR and slowly decrease NCR to a variable schedule. A routine of behavioral momentum using reinforcing tasks can be used as NCR.

DADD Express 5

Whether you are in your first year of your undergraduate pro-gram, or your final year of your doctoral program, one of the best lessons you can learn is how to make friends… outside of your network. Sure, having a support group and a great co-hort nearby is always beneficial; I am definitely not suggesting you abandon your comrades. However, it is important for your growth as a professional, and the growth of our field, if we learn how to play nicely with others. Collaborating with others also leads to harnessing shared resources and skills as well as ad-dressing common goals, which can directly lead to increased efficiency (Duffield, Olson, & Kerzman, 2013).

Why do we need to collaborate?We need collaborators in different disciplines, and in the community, so that we can share our work with others outside of our immediate network. What good is knowledge if it stays in a library or an unread manuscript? Sure, academics might cite your work, but does the community you serve access your knowledge and practical skills? Are you missing information from a different discipline that could be useful in addressing a particular issue?

We are not going to be our students’ only support, and if you think you are, you might be doing it wrong. Our students have families, caregivers, friends, occupational therapists, speech-language pathologists, pastors, grocery clerks, baristas, police officers, doctors, dentists, and so many more people that they encounter throughout their lives. Our students are a part of a community; therefore, we need to immerse ourselves in the community to learn how to best support our students. By doing this, we can learn about the issues the community values so that we can conduct relevant research as well as provide meaningful support.

How many partnerships do you need?I truly believe the number of partnerships should be individualized. Answering how many friends one needs involves critically ana-lyzing the situation. For example, similar to Satterfield et al.’s

Students’ Corner

Tearing Down Walls: Collaborating Across Disciplines

(2009) decision-making model for evidence-based practices, one should evaluate the context in which the issue is occuring, the related research, practitioner expertise and resources, as well as the learner’s characteristics. When using this framework, it might be useful to evaluate research across different disciplines, gather input from various practitioners, and require multiple people’s input regarding the learner’s characteristics.

How do we collaborate?When attempting to foster collaborations, it is imperative that common goals and missions are established from the onset of the relationship (Duffield et al., 2013). Without common goals, the collaboration will likely deteriorate. Furthermore, LeBlanc, Heinicke, and Baker (2012) suggest multiple ways to expand be-havior analysis across disciplines, but the same strategies could pertain to special educators. Some suggestions include review-ing multidisciplinary literature, and identifying and developing relationships with relevant professional groups. LeBlanc et al. (2012) also suggested obtaining training and supervision in the target area of interest, identifying professional credentials, and developing effective communication skills.

How do we maintain partnerships?Although a concerted effort is necessary for developing partnerships, continuous communication and feedback are key to maintaining collaborations (Duffield et al., 2013). Each of the partners must be willing to engage in continuous evaluations, and, if needed, partners must be willing to change the structure of the collaboration. Finally, the partnership must mutually benefit all collaborators. This reciprocity is necessary to create a sustainable collaboration in which all involved not only contribute, but also mutually benefit. ◼

ReferencesDuffield, S., Olson, A., & Kerzman, R. (2013). Crossing borders, break-

ing boundaries: Collaboration among higher education institutions. Innovative Higher Education, 38(3), 237–250.

LeBlanc, L. A., Heinicke, M. R., & Baker, J. C. (2012). Expanding the consumer base for behavior analytic services: Meeting the needs of consumers in the 21st century. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 5, 4–14.

Satterfield, J. M., Spring, B., Brownson, R. C., Mullen, E. J., Newhouse, R. P., Walker, B. B., & Whitlock, E. P. (2009). Toward a trans-disciplinary model of evidence-based practice. The Milbank Quar-terly, 87(2), 368–90.

Cary E. Trump University of Georgia

DADD Express6

(President’s Message, continued from page 2)

their own inquiry to better understand how their students will process and engage meaningfully in the activity. This allows teachers to have an understanding not only of the general concepts, but also to explore the fun and sometimes silly assumptions they are going to make, in anticipation that kids also will experience the activity in a similar way. Instead of simply looking at the grown-up concept of the activity, I require that my students experience the activity themselves.

Providing hands-on activities to understand STEM gives students access to the curriculum in multiple modes through UDL supports. When educators are participating in the investi-gations themselves, they are learning through their own hands-on experiences how to apply UDL supports for their individual students. Here are some questions to ask to check that UDL strategies are being used:

1. Are you providing several different materials of the same type to explore the concept? (e.g., different sizes and tex-tures of balls)

2. Do students have several opportunities to try and repeat the activity?

3. Are you using media to document the students’ learning? Are you showing the students pictures and reflecting on the activities?

4. Are the materials accessible with scaffolds based on the mobility of the student?

5. Are you incorporating preferred items, reinforcers, or adults to support the students?

6. Do students have the necessary supports for communication about the activity?

7. Are you using multiple modes of assessment to assess the product and process, such as photos, checklists, and dis-cussion with the student?

As educators, we are able to best meet the needs of all our students when we can understand how they experience learning activities. Each of our students with developmental disabilities will have unique UDL support needs to participate meaning-fully in engineering/STEM explorations, but our willingness to play and understand the material ourselves will ensure that we are fully prepared to support them.

For additional information and resources, please see this blog post from one of my past trainings: http://blogs.umb.edu/angelastone/2016/07/. ◼

ReferencesAdams, A. E., Miller, B. G., Saul, M., & Pegg, J. (2014). Supporting

elementary pre-service teachers to teach STEM through place-based teaching and learning experiences. Electronic Journal of Sci-ence Education, 18(5), n5.

Butera, G., Horn, E. M., Palmer, S. B., Friesen, A., & Lieber, J. (2016). Understanding Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Math-ematics (STEAM). In Handbook of Early Childhood Special Educa-tion (pp. 143–161). Cham: Springer.

Center for Applied Special Technology. (2012). UDL guidelines 2.0: National Center on Universal Design for Learning. Retrieved from http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines

Courtade, G. R., Browder, D. M., Spooner, F., & DiBiase, W. (2010). Training teachers to use an inquiry-based task analysis to teach sci-ence to students with moderate and severe disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 53(3), 378–399.

Council, J. (2018). The Effects of Project-Based Learning and Motivation on Students with Disabilities (Doctoral dissertation, Nova South-eastern University).

Cunningham, C. M., Lachapelle, C. P., & Davis, M. E. (2018). Engineering concepts, practices, and trajectories for early childhood education. In Early Engineering Learning (pp. 135–174). Singapore: Springer.

Jimenez, B. A., Browder, D. M., Spooner, F., & Dibiase, W. (2012). Inclusive inquiry science using peer-mediated embedded instruction for students with moderate intellectual disability. Exceptional Children, 78(3), 301–317.

McClure, E. R., Guernsey, L., Clements, D. H., Bales, S. N., Nichols, J., Kendall-Taylor, N., & Levine, M. H. (2017). STEM starts early: Grounding science, technology, engineering, and math education in early childhood. In Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop. Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop. 1900 Broadway, New York, NY 10023.

National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K–12 science edu-cation: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Sharapan, H. (2012). From STEM to STEAM: How early childhood educa-tors can apply Fred Rogers’ approach. Young Children, 67 (1), 36–40.

Stone-MacDonald, A., Bartolini, V. L., Douglass, A., Love, M. L. (2011). Focusing a new lens: STEM professional development for early education and care educators and programs. Retrieved from https://www.communityinclusion.org/ecs/ecs/stem/index.html

Stone-MacDonald, A., Wendell, K. B., Douglass, A. & Love, M. (2015). Engaging young engineers: Teaching problem-solving skills through STEM. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

(Teachers’ Corner, continued from page 1)

We have some additional transitions with regard to ap-pointed positions that have been finalized. Teresa Taber Doughty has been our fearless leader and Executive Director since January of 2014, and 2019 will be her final year in that role. Emily Bouck, a DADD past president and current board member, will assume this role in January of 2020. Another long-time board stalwart, Gardner Umbarger, has been treasurer for as long as I’ve been on the board! His term will also end this year, and Lynne Stansberry Brusnahan, who has previously served on the DADD board, will take on that role in January 2020. As Emily transitions to Executive Director, Bree Jimenez will assume the responsibilities of Communications Chair. Fi-nally, I have been serving as publications chair since 2012, and in January of 2020, Jim Thompson will take over that role. Em-ily, Lynne, Bree, and Jim are shadowing the current appointees for their respective new roles for 2019 and will be ready to hit the ground running in early 2020. We’ll certainly have more to say about the important role that Teresa and Gardner have played for the division as we get further into the year.

We’re finalizing plans for the second 1-day DADD mini-conference, to be held this summer in Fayetteville, Arkansas. Look for more information soon.

That’s all I have for now—thanks for all you do for DADD. ◼

DADD Express 7

2019 DADD Conference HighlightsThis past January, 400 delegates, presenters, and exhibitors cel-ebrated DADD’s 20th International Conference on Autism, In-tellectual Disability, & Developmental Disabilities in Lahaina, Maui! Highlights from the 3-day conference include:

Focused Training: Pre-conference training institutes on Supervision in Applied Settings and Ethics in Providing Sexuality Education and Using Current and Emerging Technologies to Enhance Outcomes for Students with ASD and/or Intellectual Disability.

Advocacy in Action: Our conference concluded with a special screening of Intelligent Lives, an incredibly powerful and compelling documentary produced by Dan Habib, which showcases the importance of understanding individuals with intellectual disability, their strengths and gifts, and the need to redefine potential and disability.

Self-advocate Voice: Micah Fi-alka Feldman, self-advocate, teach-ing assistant, inspirational speaker, and disability rights pioneer, pro-vided the opening keynote address, Through the Same Door. Micah’s keynote was compelling, humorous, and insightful. Additionally, Micah’s

mother and father delivered a plenary session sharing the fam-ily’s perspective, and they participated in a Q&A at the closing general session.

Program Excellence: It doesn’t get much better than a high-energy, 3-day program with 270+ research-informed breakout and poster presentations, representing incredible depth and breadth in the fields of autism and intellectual disability!

Networking Opportunities: Conference participants enjoyed interacting with educators, researchers, and colleagues at each of the four poster presentation sessions (168 posters in total), at the President’s Reception, at lunch on Thursday, and on

Thursday and Friday morn-ings. Additionally, DADD hosted an Early Career Lunch, a Student Lunch, and a Student Social.

Continuing Education:DADD provides Professional Development Hours (PDHs) and BACB-approved continuing education sessions; BCBA conference participants received BACB CEUs at no additional cost!

DADD Membership Outreach: Division members at the conference were welcome to attend the annual General Business Meeting and DADD Committee Meetings.

Student Poster Presentation Award: It was a 3-way tie! Congratulations to Elizabeth Reyes, M.Ed., doctoral student, UNC-C: Effects of Multi-Component Intervention Package on Mathematical Problem Solving; Andrea Forsyth, M.Ed., doctoral student, University of Nevada, Reno: Digital Literacy Practices for Students with ID; and Natalie Pullen, MA, NBCT, doctoral candidate, University of Washington: Teacher PD on Writing In-struction for Students with Low-Incidence Disabilities.

Save the Date! Plan to join us in sunny Sarasota, Florida, for DADD’s 21st conference on January 22–24, 2020.

For additional information on DADD’s conferences, please contact Cindy Perras, DADD Conference coordinator, at cindy.perras@gmail.com. ◼

DADD Awards Presented at the 2019 DADD Annual Conference At this year’s DADD General Business Meeting in Maui, Hawaii, several extraordinary individuals received awards. Following are the awards and award winners for 2019:

The Teacher of the Year Award was given to Abigail Hallett and Amanda Lewis of Adult Community Education (ACE) of Leon Transition Program, Leon County Schools, in Tallahassee, Florida. They are a strong co-teaching team with a clear commit-ment to serving transition-age students by providing high quality education and focus on important skills and opportunities.

The Tom E. C. Smith Early Career Award is given to someone who is in the beginning of his or her career and shows prom-ise in contributing greatly to the field. This year’s winner was Dr. Jenny Root of Florida State University. She has made a

unique contribution to the field of developmental disabilities in the area of mathematics and especially in developing ways to make algebra accessible to students with moderate and severe dis-abilities.

The Research Award was given to Dr. Vicki Knight of the University of British Columbia, for her significant contribution to the field and demonstrated commitment to individuals with intellectual disability, autism, and developmental disabilities.

The Burton Blatt Humanitarian Award is given to someone who has been a leader and advocate for many years in the area of intellectual disabilities. This year’s recipient was Dr. Dianne Zager who is the Head of School for the Shrub Oak International School in Shrub Oak, NY. Dr. Zager is recognized for her long-time advocacy in the field, and her research and outreach have made a significant contribution to the field. She will officially receive her award at the 2020 DADD International Conference in Sarasota, Florida. ◼

DADD Express8

Diversity NewsThank you to everyone who participated in our DADD show-case, Increasing Intersectionality and Diversity in DADD and the Field: A Conversation, at CEC this year!

The panelists, Elizabeth A. Harkins, Ed.D. (William Pat-erson University), Amrita Chaturvedi, Ph.D. (Saint Louis Uni-versity), Gloria Y. Niles, Ph.D. (University of Hawaii - West Oahu), and Ruth Eyres, M.S.E., NCBT (Easterseals Arkansas) facilitated a discussion that asked session participants to share their experiences related to identity, particularly those identi-ties that are impacted by multiple and often overlapping forms of oppression. The participants were guided into a critique of the validity of such approaches in their personal practices. Fi-nally, panelists discussed opportunities to further the advocacy and development of social justice in special education.

The conversation was powerful, and participants identified common challenges:

DADD Awards NominationsThe following awards are given each year through a nomination process by members and friends of DADD:

• Teacher of the Year• Para-Educator of the Year

• Shriver–Kennedy Student Achievement Award

• John W. Kidd Subdivision Award

• Burton Blatt Humanitarian Award

• Legislative Award

• Research Award

• Tom E. C. Smith Early Career Award

We encourage anyone to nominate persons whom they believe should be recognized for their work, service, research,

and/or leadership in the field of developmental disabilities and autism spectrum disorders. Nominations are submitted to the Awards Chair and then voted on by the voting members of the DADD Awards Committee.

Awards presented at: DADD Annual Conference, January 22–24, 2020.

Nomination deadline: October 1, 2019.

Winners informed: by November 1, 2019.

For descriptions of the awards and to submit a nomina-tion, please go to the following link (https://goo.gl/forms/ q6ys9Ecu1TTZOLyL2), to complete the Google Docs form. You may also request a form and submit any addi-tional materials to: Angi Stone-MacDonald, Awards Chair (angela.stone@umb.edu). ◼

1. expanding topics of race and disability to other concepts of social identity like socioeconomic status and gender,

2. identifying non-biased evaluation tools for teacher can-didates, and

3. addressing biases, discrimination, and diversity more openly within special education.

Participants also reported needs to create opportunities for diverse leadership and to prioritize sessions like these at confer-ences. Distributed resources defined concepts of social justice and intersectionality and identified how to approach anti-bias education in early childhood classrooms through the college experience. The DADD Diversity Committee looks forward to continuing this important work.

If you would like to get more involved with DADD’s Di-versity Committee with concepts of intersectionality in special education or in DADD, or to access the resources described above, please contact Liz Harkins, Diversity Committee Chair, at harkinse@wpunj.edu. ◼

DADD Website:http://www.daddcec.com/

Editor’s Note: Interested in writing for DADD Express or serving as a reviewer? We are soliciting articles for Teachers’ Corner and for our Evidence-based Practices and Legal Briefs sections. If you would like to contribute, please contact me with ideas or questions (christopher.denning@umb.edu).