Orientation and Mobility Career,College,and Community Readiness Standards: A Delphi Study

Abstract

Introduction:

Performance standards drive current instructional practice. Disability-specific curricula is a critical component in preparing children for postsecondary transition. Currently, no standards govern instruction in orientation and mobility (O&M) skills for children with visual impairments. Standards for O&M would provide structure for educational equity in assuring that students with visual impairments receive a free and appropriate education.

Method:

This study used Delphi survey methods to determine consensus on the validity of the Orientation and Mobility Career, College, and Community Readiness Standards (O&M CCCRS). Consensus was measured as 80% or better agreement. Three survey rounds were initiated and two were completed by a purposive sample of certified orientation and mobility specialist (COMS) from two participant groups: Seven COMS from primary and secondary school–based settings and three from personnel preparation.

Results:

This Delphi study achieved consensus on the O&M CCCRS five student-performance standards (end of Grade 12 or age 21 years) as well as the corresponding age- and grade–level performance indicators at ages 24 months, 4 years, end of Grade 3, end of Grade 7, and end of Grade 12. Consensus was reached on all but two performance indicators (83 of the 85).

Discussion:

The Round 1 survey established validity of five O&M Domains: (1) Concept Development, (2) Sensory Development, (3) Orientation and Mapping, (4) Travel Techniques, and (5) Communication, Personal Safety, and Advocacy. Subsequent survey rounds found that 80% of participants agreed on the inclusion of 83 of the 85 performance indicators corresponding to those domains.

Implications for practitioners:

Alignment of O&M standards to Common Core Standards empowers teams to justify the instructional time, to document skill acquisition relative to the benchmarks of general-education peers, and to show where O&M skills support progress in common core and state learning standards.

Keywords

content standards orientation and mobility common core Delphi blind visual impairment

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Borg

W. R.

Gall

M. D.

(1983). Educational research: An introduction (4th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.

Briggs

(1999). Framework for independent travel: A resource for orientation and mobility instruction. Government of British Columbia. Victoria, BC: Crown Publications.

Clayton

M. J.

(1997). Delphi: A technique to harness expert opinion for critical decision-making tasks in education. Educational Psychology, 17, 373–384.

Cmar

J. L.

(2015). Orientation and mobility skills and outcome expectations as predictors of employment for young adults with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 109, 95–106.

Common Core State Standards Initiative. (n.d.a). Development process [Website]. Retrieved November 2, 2017, from http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/development-process/

Common Core State Standards Initiative. (n.d.b). English language arts standards “introduction” key design consideration [Website]. Retrieved November 4, 2017, from http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/introduction/key-design-consideration/

Common Core State Standards Initiative. (n.d.c). Mathematics Standards [Website]. Retrieved August 8, 2012, from http://www.corestandards.org/Math/

Corn

Hatlen

Huebner

Ryan

Siller

(1996). Developing the national agenda for the education of children and youths with visual impairments, including those with multiple disabilities. RE: View, 28, 5–17.

Fazzi

Naimy

(2010). Chapter 8: Teaching orientation and mobility to school age children. In Wiener

W. R.

Welsh

Blasch

(Eds.), Foundations of orientation and mobility (3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 208–262). New York, NY: AFB Press.

10.

Forsika

(1998). Restructuring around standards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

11.

Goals 2000: Educate America Act of 1994, P.L. 103-227.

12.

Hogarth

R. M.

(1978). A note on aggregating opinions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 21, 40–46.

13.

Hsu

C. C.

Sandford

B. A.

(2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 12, 1–8. Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=12&n=10

14.

Huebner

K. M.

Merk-Adam

Stryker

Wolffe

(2004). The national agenda for the education of children and youths with visual impairments, including those with multiple disabilities. New York, NY: AFB Press.

15.

Individuals With Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, P.L. 105-17 (1999).

16.

Koehler

(2018, March). Deep dive! Unpacking and analyzing the dynamics affecting the role and function of the teacher of students with visual impairments. AZAER Spring 2018 Workshop, Phoenix, AZ.

17.

Lohmeier

Blankenship

Hatlen

(2009). Expanded core curriculum: 12 years later. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 103, 103–112.

18.

Michigan Department of Education, Low Incidence Outreach. (2017). Michigan severity rating scale. Lansing: Michigan Department of Education.

19.

Mitchell

V. W.

(1991). The Delphi technique: An exposition and application. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 3, 333–358.

20.

Pogrund

Sewell

Anderson

Calaci

Cowart

M. F.

Gonzales

C. M.

… Roberson-Smith

. (2012). TAPS: An orientation and mobility curriculum for students with visual impairments (3rd ed.). Austin: Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired.

21.

Sapp

Hatlen

(2010). The expanded core curriculum: Where we have been, where we are going, and how we can get there. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 104, 338–348.

22.

Somerville

J. A.

(2007). Critical factors affecting the meaningful assessment of student learning outcomes: A Delphi study of the opinions of community college personnel (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Oregon State University, Corvallis.

23.

Tellefson

(2013). Spatiotemporal development document. Unpublished manuscript.

24.

Tellefson

(2015). Orientation and mobility career, college and community readiness standards. Unpublished manuscript.

25.

Tellefson

Anderson

Thurston

Williams

(1997). Orientation and mobility: A developmental curriculum for assessment and program planning. Janesville: Wisconsin Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired.

26.

Tellefson

Koehler

(1999). Executive summary. Wisconsin vision teachers survey results: Issues affecting delivery of services to students with visual impairments in the state of Wisconsin. Green Bay: Wisconsin AER.

27.

Thangaratinam

Redman

C. W. E.

(2005). The Delphi technique. The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist, 7, 120–125. doi:10.1576/toag.7.2.120.27071

28.

Wall Emerson

Corn

A. L.

(2006). Orientation and mobility instructional content for children and youths: A Delphi study. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 100, 331–342.

29.

Wiener

W. R.

Welsh

Blasch

(Eds.). (2010). Foundations of orientation and mobility (3rd ed., Vol. 1). New York, NY: AFB Press.

30.

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. (2012). Common core state standards for literacy in all subjects. Madison: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.