Evaluating Teacher Language Within General and Special Education Classrooms Serving Elementary Students with Autism.
Nicole Sparapani, Vanessa P Reinhardt, Jessica L Hooker and 3 others
PMID 34106392WHAT IT FOUND
Teachers in special education used more language overall than those in general education, but mostly directives and close-ended questions.
Students with limited vocabulary received less language in general education settings, but not in special education.
Key findings
01Special education teachers used more verbal bids overall and directed a higher proportion toward individual students compared to general education teachers.
02Across both settings, directives and close-ended questions were the most frequent types of talk, while open-ended questions were rare.
03In general education classrooms, teachers used less language with students who had limited receptive vocabulary, a pattern not seen in special education.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The analysis was based on a 15-minute video sample, which may not represent the full school day. The sample size was considered small for the complex statistical models used, and the nested nature of the data (students within classrooms) could not be fully accounted for in the multi-group analysis. The study did not collect data on teacher-student ratios or specific instructional approaches, which may influence language patterns. Differences in racial and ethnic composition between general and special education settings may have introduced bias.
Declared interests
The study was funded by the Institute of Education Sciences and the Office of Special Education Programs. No other conflicts of interest were declared.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the high frequency of directives in special education as a failure of the teacher. The study shows that teachers adapt their language to student characteristics; students with more severe autism symptoms or lower cognitive skills receive more directives and less open-ended language, which may reflect an attempt to manage behavior or accommodate comprehension levels rather than poor practice.