Effect of Instructional training package on level of Knowledge and practice among primary school teachers regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children

Rakhi Das¹, Dr. Sr. Tresa Anto², Dr. Angela Gnanadurai³, Dr. Aparna Namboodiripad⁴, Ms. Jaicy John⁵

¹MSc Nursing Student, Jubilee Mission College of Nursing, Thrissur, Kerala.

²Guide, Vice-Principal Jubilee Mission College of Nursing, Thrissur, Kerala.

³Principal, Jubilee Mission College of Nursing, Thrissur, Kerala.

⁴Asso Professor, Department of Pediatric Medicine, JMMC and RI, Thrissur.

⁵Asst Professor, Jubilee Mission College of Nursing, Thrissur, Kerala.

*Corresponding Author E-mail: rakhiinchrist@gmail.com

ABSTRACT:

Learning disability is a global problem. This study was conducted to assess the effect of instructional training package (ITP) on level of knowledge and practice among primary school teachers regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities (SLD) in children in selected schools, Thrissur. Objectives: Assess the level of knowledge and practice among primary school teachers regarding identification and management of SLD in children, compare the effect of ITP on level of knowledge and practice and associate the pretest level of knowledge and practice with selected socio-demographic and academic data variables. Methodology: Pre-experimental one group pre-test post-test design. Data was collected from thirty samples recruited by non-probability purposive sampling method, using self-structured knowledge questionnaire and practice checklist followed by ITP. Posttest was conducted after 1week. Results: Majority 29 (96.7%) of the samples were female, 26 (86.7%) were married, 13 (43.3%) had education Plus Two with D. Ed and 18 (60%) had teaching experience of 6 years and above. Majority 26 (86.7%) of the samples received no special training for handling students with learning disabilities (LD) and only 15 (50%) had personal experience in handling children with LD. The overall mean posttest knowledge score (27.53±1.306) was highly significant than mean pretest score (16.90±2.339) with calculated paired ‘t’ (t₂₉= 24.72, p<0.01). The overall mean posttest practice score (19.73±0.740) was highly significant than the mean pretest score (13.77±2.967) with calculated paired ‘t’ (t₂₉= 10.73, p<0.01). A highly significant association (p<0.05) was observed between education (χ²= 21.690, p<0.01), years of experience (χ²= 13.970, p<0.01) and experience in handling students with learning disabilities (χ²= 30, p<0.01) with pretest practice score of the samples. Conclusion: ITP is an effective tool for increasing the level of knowledge and practice among primary school teachers regarding identification and management of SLD in children.

KEYWORDS: Instructional training package, level of knowledge, level of practice, primary school teachers, learning disabilities in children.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:

A study to assess the effect of instructional training package on level of knowledge and practice among primary school teachers regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children in selected schools, Thrissur.

BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE:

Learning disability is a global problem with estimated nearly four million children suffering from learning disorders, out of which around 35% of children usually drop out of high school. Around 50 - 80% of students in the United States who have low reading skills in primary level have either a suspected or diagnosed learning disability.¹ The International Dyslexia Association stated that around three – fourth of all students who have unidentified learning disabilities till third grade remain poor readers in higher grades unless they get effective phonological training in lower grades itself.² A classroom with minimal distractions and the teacher’s expectation for a student to attend classroom activity within his or her capability defines the child's academic success.³ Teachers have an incredible role in deliverance of in-depth and quality education to students and lead them towards excellence by personal commitment in teaching and learning. The nurse involved in child health care should actively participate in planning and implementation of strategies to increase awareness of learning disability to the primary school teachers.⁴

The investigator as a pediatric nurse felt an intense desire to educate the school teachers regarding their role in identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children like dyslexia and dyscalculia which can be managed in early stages with proper guidance and support with the help of an instructional training package.

OBJECTIVES:

1. To assess the level of knowledge and practice among primary school teachers regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children before and after the instructional training package

2. To compare the effect of instructional training package on level of knowledge and practice among primary school teachers regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children after the intervention

3. To associate the pretest level of knowledge and practice regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children with selected socio-demographic and academic data variables

HYPOTHESES:

H₁: There is significant difference between the level of knowledge of primary school teachers regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children before and after the intervention.

H₂: There is significant difference between the level of practice of primary school teachers regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children before and after the intervention.

H₃: There is significant association between pre-test level of knowledge and practice of primary school teachers regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children with selected socio-demographic and academic data variables.

METHODOLOGY:

A pre-experimental one group pre-test post-test design was used to examine the effect of instructional training package on level of knowledge and practice among primary school teachers regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children in selected schools, Thrissur among 30 participants selected by purposive sampling method. Prior permission from research committee and institutions were obtained before data collection. Pretest was conducted using self-developed structured knowledge assessment questionnaire and practice assessment checklist to assess knowledge and practice of primary school teachers regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children. The scoring were interpreted as adequate, moderately adequate and inadequate for both knowledge and practice separately. Instructional training package regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children including power-point presentation, group discussion and provision of a self-developed information booklet was administered following the pretest. Posttest was conducted after one week. Data analysis was done with descriptive and inferential statistics using SPSS IBM 20 software. Content validity and reliability for the tools and intervention were checked and accepted from experts.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION:

Out of the 30 samples, 13 (43.3%) samples were in the age group 30 -40 years 7 (23.3%) were in the age group 40-50 years, 8 (26.7%) of the samples were in age group 20-30 years and only 2 (6.7%) were in the age group 50 years and above. Majority 29 (96.7%) of the participants were female and only 1 (3.3%) was male. 26 (86.7%) of the participants were married. Most 13 (43.3%) of the samples had education Plus two with D. Ed (TTC), 8 (26.7%) of the samples were PG with B. Ed degree, 5 (16.7%) had Degree with B. Ed and 4 (13.3%) had other educational qualifications. 18 (60%) of the samples had teaching experience of 6 years and above. Majority 26 (86.7%) of the samples received no special training for handling students with learning disabilities and only 15 (50%) of the samples had personal experience in handling children with learning disabilities. (see table 1)

Table 1: Frequency and percentage distribution of samples based on age, gender, marital status, educational qualification, teaching experience

Socio demographic and academic data variables	Characteristics	Frequency (f)	(%)
Age	20 – 30 yrs	8	26.7
	30- 40 yrs	13	43.3
	40- 50 yrs	7	23.3
	50 and above	2	6.7
Gender	Male	1	3.3
Gender	Female	29	96.7
Marital status	Married	26	86.7
	Single	2	6.7
	Separated/Divorced	1	3.3
	Widow / Widower	1	3.3
Education	Plus two with D. Ed (TTC)	13	43.3
	Degree with B. Ed	5	16.7
	PG with B. Ed	8	26.7
	Others	4	13.3
Teaching experience	< 1 year	3	10
	1 - 3 years	6	20
	3- 6years	3	10
	≥6 years	18	60
Special training for learning disability	No	26	86.7
Special training for learning disability	Yes	4	13.3

Out of the 15 Teachers who had personal experience in handling children with learning disabilities used various strategies in handling the students; 3(20%) of samples informed higher authorities, 6(40%) samples modified teaching methodology and gave extra attention to the student, 2(13.3%) samples informed to parents directly and 4(26.7%) used all these strategies.

The overall level of knowledge in identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children among the primary school teachers was computed as; 3 (10%) had inadequate, 26(86.7%) had moderately adequate and only 1(3.3%) had adequate level of knowledge in the pretest. Whereas in the posttest all of the participants 30(100%) had adequate level of knowledge regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children. The overall level of practice in identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children among the primary school teachers was computed as; 4(13.3%) had inadequate level of practice, 11(36.7%) had moderately adequate level of practice and 15(50%) had adequate level of practice in the pretest; whereas in the posttest all of the participants 30(100%) had adequate level of practice regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children. (see table 2)

Table 2: Distribution of samples based on the pretest and posttest level of knowledge on identification and management of selected learning disabilities (n=30)

Sl. No.	Components		Level of knowledge
			Adequate		Moderately adequate		Inadequate
			f	%	f	%	f	%
1.	Overall level of knowledge	Pretest	1	3.3	26	86.7	3	10
1.	Overall level of knowledge	Posttest	30	100	0	0	0	0
2.	Overall level of knowledge	Pretest	15	50	11	36.7	4	13.3
2.	Overall level of knowledge	Posttest	30	100	0	0	0	0

Fig. 1: Distribution of mean pretest and posttest knowledge scores of the primary school teachers in different components of knowledge regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children. (n=30)

Fig 2: Distribution of mean of overall pretest and posttest practice scores of the primary school teachers in different components of practice regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children (n=30)

Table 3: Mean, mean difference, Standard deviation, standard error and ‘t’ value of the pretest and posttest level of knowledge and level of practice on identification and management of selected learning disabilities (n=30)

Observation		Mean	Mean Difference	Standard Deviation	Standard Error	‘t’ value	p value
Level of knowledge	Pretest	16.90	10.63	2.339	0.427	24.72	<0.01**
Level of knowledge	Posttest	27.53	10.63	1.306	0.238	24.72	<0.01**
Level of practice	Pretest	13.77	5.96	2.967	0.542	10.73	<0.01**
Level of practice	Posttest	19.73	5.96	0.740	0.135	10.73	<0.01**

(t_29
=2.045, p<0.05), **highly significant p<0.01

Table 4: Chi square (χ²), degrees of freedom (df), and p value of association of pretest level of practice with education, years of experience and experience in handling students with learning disabilities. (n=30)

Socio-demographic and academic variables	Pretest level of practice						χ²	df	p value
	Adequate		Moderately adequate		Inadequate
	f	%	f	%	f	%
Education							21.690	3	<0.01**
Plus two with D. Ed	7	53.8	5	38.5	1	7.7
Degree with B. Ed	5	100	0	0	0	0
PG with B. Ed	3	37.5	5	62.5	0	0
Others	0	0	1	25	3	75
Years of Experience							13.970	3	<0.030*
Below 1 year	1	33.3	0	0	2	66.7
1 – 3 years	3	50	1	16.7	2	33.3
3 – 6 years	2	66.7	1	33.3	0	0
6 years and above	10	55.7	8	44.3	0	0
Experience in handling Students with LD							30	1	<0.01**
Yes	15	100	0	0	0	0
No	0	0	11	73.3	4	26.7

** highly significant p<0.01, *significant p<0.05

CONCLUSION:

The current study showed that there was a significant increase in the level of knowledge with a mean difference of 10.63, (p<0.01) and significant increase in level of practice with a mean difference of 5.96, (p<0.01) in the post test. This change was achieved after the administration of the instructional training package including presentation on the identification and management of selected learning disabilities, group discussion and provision of information booklet on identification and management of selected learning disabilities (dyslexia and dyscalculia) developed for the primary school teachers. Thus, all the formulated hypotheses were accepted from the analysis findings. The study findings were supported by various similar studies conducted in different places. In view of the various study findings and the current study results, the researcher strongly agrees that knowledge and practice of the primary school teachers may or may not associate with their socio-demographic and academic variables always. It depends on the particular teachers’ exposure to experience, environment, attitude on learning and practicing teaching skills. Thus, it was concluded that instructional training package was effective in increasing the level of knowledge and practice among primary school teachers regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities in children.

Based on the current study findings, the researcher distributed an individual copy of self-developed information booklet to all the participants including basic details regarding dyslexia and dyscalculia, signs and symptoms, role of teacher in identification of the selected learning disability as well as classroom and teaching practice modification for children with learning disabilities. Contact numbers and details of learning disabilities trainers, training and referral centers for children with learning disabilities were also provided along with the developed booklet. The study findings were discussed with the headmistress of the respective schools of research setting regarding effectiveness and importance of instructional training to the teachers, and extra copies of the intervention were provided to all the three schools. They agreed upon the fact that in-service education and training should be implemented for the primary school teachers periodically.

LIMITATIONS:

1. Sample size were too small and limited to 30 which limits the generalization the study findings

2. Study was limited to 3 settings only and data collection and analysis time period was limited in respect to the study statement

3. Only two learning disabilities were included in the study

4. Study did not assessed the attitude of the school teachers regarding learning disabilities

5. Study did not included any training or direct assessment of children to identify learning disability

6. Post test was not conducted with the same observation practice checklist but it was modified as self reported practice rating and converted to checklist due to the changes faced and precautionary actions taken during outbreak of global pandemic COVID-19.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

On the basis of the present study that has been conducted, the following recommendations were put forward:

1. A similar study can be performed with a larger sample size, longer duration, in more settings

2. A similar study can be done including wide range of prevalent learning disabilities.

3. A similar study can be done adding attitude component along with knowledge and practice of the teachers

4. A study can be conducted to assess factors influencing and hindering effective practice to identify and manage learning disabilities in children.

5. Separate studies can be performed in government aided and private schools.

6. A Comparative study can be conducted to determine the difference in level of knowledge, attitude among the primary school teachers regarding identification and management of selected learning disabilities

7. A comparative study can be conducted to determine the effect of two different interventional programme

8. A true experimental study can be done using control group to improve the outcome and generalizability.

9. Knowledge and practice standards, resource materials like booklet, pamphlet and in service programme can be developed for teachers by the nursing community in collaboration with elementary department of education in the light of review of various literature.

REFERENCE:

1. Statistics on Learning disabilities. May 2009. Available from URL: http://www.bridges_to_practice.com. accessed on February 2019

2. Bonnie Terry. Why is it important to identify if a child has a Learning Difficulty? Available from https:// www.howtolearn.com/2011/04/why-is-it-important-to-identify-if-a-child-has-a-learning-difficulty/ accessed on April 2019

3. Roger P, George G. Classroom Management Techniques for Students with ADHD: A Step-by-Step Guide for Educators. Corwin Press: SAGE Publications; 2007

4. Yamini. Effectiveness of video assisted teaching programe on knowledge regarding management of learning disability among primary school teachers. TNNMC JPN Vol VI (1). Jan – Jun 2018

Received on 19.12.2020 Modified on 19.02.2021

Int. J. Nur. Edu. and Research. 2021; 9(2):156-160.

DOI: 10.5958/2454-2660.2021.00038.7