In This Issue

Fall/Winter 2005
Volume 1 • Issue 2

Professors Receive
Allan Meyers Award

Director’s Corner

UM Students Receive
National Award

Center Updates Acronym

Prevention Center
of Excellence

$2.9M Reading Program Grant

Director Named
AUCD President

New Leadership for CAC

Search Tool Facilitates
Access to MEC Training

Grant to Increase Access
to Volunteer Opportunities

Intervention Methods
Subject of Conference

Screening Instrument
Under Development

Co-Instructional Model
Developed by CCIDS

Center Staff Star in
New Video

Guest Column:
CAC Member Tours
South Africa

Brain Research Informs
Best Practice

Partnership for EC
Health Formed

Presentations & Publications

CenterPoint Home

In 1999, the Center for Community Inclusion and Disability Studies (CCIDS) designed and offered a university course to staff development leaders entitled: Supporting Diversity in Our Communities: Leadership in Staff Development. One of the unique aspects of this course was its use of a co-instructional model in which an individual with a developmental disability, a family member, and two professionals collaborated to develop and teach the course. As the course was taught, the team continually reflected on practices and the meaning of co-instruction. As a result of the experience, the following definition of co-instruction was developed:

Co-instruction with persons with disabilities is defined as the full participation of individuals with disabilities and their family members in all aspects of course design, selection, and development of instructional materials and activities, and in the presentation of those materials in class, workshops, or other training.

In teaching this course, co-instruction served two important functions. First, it highlighted the contributions of individuals with disabilities. Second, it helped ensure that the curriculum reflected the authentic experiences of individuals with disabilities and their family members.

This approach to teaching required a reversal in thinking about the relationship between higher education and individuals with disabilities. To the extent that individuals with disabilities had previously participated in higher education, they had usually done so as objects of scholarship and research (Linton, 1998; Linton, Mello, & O’Neill, 1994). The exclusion of individuals with disabilities, particularly persons with developmental disabilities, from academic discussions prevented them from participating in important discourses that helped shape our culture’s understanding of their life experiences. Scholarship and curriculum practices thus helped to perpetuate inequality, segregation, and powerlessness (Linton, 1998; Oliver, 1992).

To address the power differential in research, Stringer (1996) advocated “action research” as a means of engaging “subjects as equal and full participants in the research process” (p. 9). The CCIDS co-instructional team modified some of Stringer’s principles and assumptions about research as they were applied to instruction. As a result, the following principles of co-instruction were developed:

• Curriculum development and instruction are democratic,
participatory, and all participants remain informed;
• All co-instructors work together as equals with each
person’s voice valued;
• Practices are non-exploitative and the team avoids using
individuals with disabilities and family members simply as
token members of the team;
• Participation is liberating for all;
• Participation on the co-instructional team enhances the
lives of all those involved;
• Professionals act as resource persons;
• Participation is non-competitive;
• Communication is characterized by:

» Attentive listening
» Acceptance
» Language and terminology that are understandable for everyone
» Truthfulness and sincerity
» Cultural appropriateness
» Regular and consistent updates

Co-Instruction – The Larger Context
The development of the co-instructional model took place within a broader context that saw significant changes in the way people viewed supports for individuals with developmental disabilities. In the 1990s the focus of many professionals, schools, and agencies shifted away from preparing and training people with disabilities to enter inclusive communities. Instead they began to focus on providing supports that people needed to access inclusive communities immediately and unconditionally. As a result of this evolution in supports, many individuals with disabilities began to take much more active roles in our communities.

This process continues today. Increasingly, individuals with developmental disabilities are recognized as essential participants in the discourses that determine both public policy and the specific supports they receive. People with developmental disabilities, their friends, and their family members are taking much more active roles in deciding who will support them and what kind of support they will receive. Through participation on boards, committees, and as members of self-advocacy groups, individuals with disabilities are showing that they can make valuable contributions to the development of public policy. Participating as full members of instructional teams can be seen as a natural extension of broader cultural changes that have produced more inclusive communities.

Independence Plus and the Evolution of Co-Instruction
The Independence Plus project is a new waiver program under development by the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Mental Retardation Services through the University of Southern Maine, Edmund S. Muskie School of Public Service. This new waiver program, if approved, will give adults with cognitive disabilities the opportunity to direct their own services. Those who select this option will hire support brokers who help them to develop a plan, hire support staff, and monitor their budget and services.

A large component of the Independence Plus Project is training for individuals with disabilities, family members, and co-instructors. A training curriculum is currently under development by a partnership of university employees and adults with cognitive disabilities. This curriculum prepares consumers and their family members to participate in this new program. Staff members developing this training are adopting CCIDS’ co-instructional model.

Mary Kelly, of the Muskie Institute, explained, “It seemed only natural that we use a co-instructional model in this training. The goal of the project is to help people achieve greater control over their lives. Part of achieving greater control is being involved in developing the training and the teaching.”

The Independence Plus Project is philosophically consistent with the context in which the co-instructional model was originally developed. The project is designed to help individuals with disabilities and their family members gain greater control over the supports they receive. Co-instruction can also serve a very practical function in this project. The participation of individuals with disabilities in developing the training materials will undoubtedly increase the likelihood the training will be more meaningful to all participants.

In its original manifestation at CCIDS, co-instruction was used to ensure that professionals received training about individuals with disabilities that was relevant to those individuals and their families. The Independence Plus Project has taken the model one step further—using it to make training more meaningful for everyone, including individuals with developmental disabilities.

CCIDS staff members Lenny Berry, Kathy Son, and Alan Kurtz provided initial consultation to the Muskie Institute on the co-instructional model. This included providing information about the principles of co-instruction and practical information about supporting all members of the team to participate fully in developing instructional materials and teaching. Berry and CCIDS Research Associate Bonnie Robinson continue to meet with project staff on a regular basis (See story: Center Staff Star in New Video). They provide the team with information on specific supports that may be needed by instructors with developmental disabilities.

— Alan Kurtz
Kathy Son
Bonnie Robinson

References
Linton, S. (1998). Claiming disability: Knowledge and identity. New York: New York University Press.

Linton, S. Mello, S., & O’Neill, J. (1994). Locating disability in diversity. In E. Makas, and L. Schlesinger, (Eds.), Insights and outlook: Current trends in disability studies, (pp. 229-33). Portland, ME: Society for Disability Studies and Edmund S. Muskie Institute on Public Policy.

Oliver, M. (1992). Changing the Social Relations of Research Production. Disability, Handicap and Society, 7(2), 101-116.

Stringer, E.T. (1996). Action research: A handbook for practitioners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.