Practical Access Podcast

S12 E7: From Inquiry to Access: Transforming STEM for Diverse Learners

• Season 12 • Episode 7

Share episode

In this episode of Practical Access, hosts Lisa Dieker and Rebecca Hines are joined by Dr. Bree Jimenez, a professor of special education and chair of the Department of Educational Psychology at Baylor School of Education. Dr. Jimenez dives into her innovative work in making STEM education more accessible for students with disabilities.

Key topics include:

  • Inclusive Inquiry-Based Learning: Dr. Jimenez discusses how inquiry-based and explicit instruction methods can complement each other to engage students with extensive support needs.
  • Communication and Access: Strategies to ensure that students with communication challenges can actively participate in STEM lessons, including the use of assistive technology and alternate forms of expression.
  • Building Classroom Routines: The importance of establishing consistent routines to help students focus on content rather than adjusting to new processes.
  • Supporting Educators: Practical advice for general education teachers, including the use of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), peer support, and explicit instruction to foster inclusive classroom cultures.

Dr. Jimenez challenges the perceived divide between inquiry-based and explicit instruction, advocating for a blended approach to meet diverse student needs. She emphasizes the value of identifying essential skills and content in lessons while using UDL principles and systematic instruction to guide teaching.

Through examples such as integrating engineering and STEM concepts, Dr. Jimenez underscores the potential for accessible STEM education to improve post-school outcomes. Her insights offer practical, research-backed strategies for building inclusive classroom cultures where every student can thrive.

We love to hear from our listeners! If you have any questions, feel free to reach out. We look forward to receiving your questions on our Twitter (@Accesspractical) or Instagram (@Practical_Access).

Bree Jimenez Bio and Publications: https://edp.soe.baylor.edu/bree-jimenez 

Unknown:

Music.

Lisa Dieker:

Welcome to Practical Access. I'm Lisa Dieker.

Rebecca Hines:

And I'm Rebecca Hines and Lisa, I know today we are speaking with someone that you've recently, very recently, worked with, who is an expert in two things I love. Who we have?

Lisa Dieker:

Yeah. So, today we're excited to have with us. Bree Jimenez, who is a professor in special ed and the chair of the department of ed psych at Baylor. We're so excited to have you with us. Bree, thanks for joining us.

Bree Jimenez:

Thank you for inviting me.

Lisa Dieker:

So, Becky, you had two things you're excited about. I'm gonna let you kick it off, because I'm excited about a lot of things. Bree represents what we both love is, is that that deep niche in our field.

Rebecca Hines:

Well, Bree my you know I love your topics, because I know that particularly the population of students who have more difficulty in communication, maybe higher need students, if you will, that population so often is forced into one type of instruction, and I would love to hear a little bit about your approach to opening up a more inquiry based learning opportunity for populations that sometimes get side checked.

Bree Jimenez:

Absolutely I you know, it's funny, I kind of fell into this area because for so long I was working on general curriculum access for students with more significant disabilities. And by that I mean students often with more moderate, severe intellectual disabilities, communication sometimes students on autism spectrum and with more complex communication needs, and we kept doing some great work in math and science, and we would get, you know, really kind of deep into often, you know, just even figuring out how to create access. But then, you know, little by little, as we grow as researchers and educators and we learn, you know, I kind of always believe the kids can do whatever it is that we figure out how to teach them. So, it's usually has to do much more with us as the educators. But we kept getting into vocabulary, and then we started, kind of creating access to text. And then we started creating access to, you know, how to use explicit and systematic instruction for comprehension questions, but really kind of at the nuts and bolts of it all. We kept kind of jumping back into a lot of literacy skills and started looking at, you know, in some of our early work, Ginevra Courtade, who I work with quite often now, when her dissertation, many moons ago, was really looking at inquiry. And over the past, gosh, 15 years, we've kind of said, what does that actually mean for, you know, this group of kids, and what does that look like? And, you know, often have been pushing up against, sometimes that false dichotomy of inquiry versus explicit instruction, which I don't believe that there's a verse, it's kind of a yes and type of situation.

Lisa Dieker:

I love that. I love that yes and and, you know, I think one of the yes and that schools struggle with. And I this is true. I was just out of school last week, and we were, you know, looking at some beautiful students who had, you know, extensive support needs in communication and behavior, and really, a real desire to put them in classes, and we were talking about science, and I think one of the questions that came up that I would love to get your expertise on is, you know, what about the students that are in the group but don't understand a communication board or don't know how to communicate with a friend who doesn't speak in an inquiry based and you know, as you well know, the elementary classroom, someone tends to take over for you, usually a little girl that says, Oh, let me just do everything for you. And so what's some of your advice to schools and teachers that are like, going, yeah, we want to do inquiry, but we're not sure how to do that when students have more extensive communication needs in the classroom, and it's education based?

Bree Jimenez:

So, one of the things over the past couple of years that I've been really, really really thinking about is this idea that, you know, even within the next generation science standards, they actually, you know, for just because terminology gets us in trouble often, and we say inquiry, and then there gets this, you know, idea that it's this fixed set of steps. And, you know, the next generation science standards will even talk about it as a practice. And you know, the word practice seems to work better with us, because we don't have these false preconceived notions of what we did, where we were told, first you do this, you know, then you do this. And I think one of the things with inquiry to. Is that we are very, very we often see a like over, dependency on, on this idea that the way that we show what we know is through verbal responses. And that's what's so much fun about true you know, inquiry in a classroom is that we can show what we know and show what we want to do or or show what we might want to try or respond in lots of different ways. And so one of the cool things is about like science and engineering, and often, you know, even within mathematics and STEM fields is thinking about all the ways that kids can do and we can then start to look for consistencies. And I think the other kind of hard part within that is this idea that it has to be open or nothing. And open inquiry is very different than guided inquiry. And well, they're, I guess they're not totally different. They're, it's this idea, and we do it already. And I think often, if we use words like scaffolding, often, you know, our special educators and general educators could talk much more efficiently back and forth, where, when we start to say prompting hierarchies or things like that that are much more kind of driven within systematic instruction or explicit instruction, that sometimes our teams are not all fluent on. We're not speaking the same language. But when we really get down to the nuts and bolts through discussing what's going on in a classroom, everybody kind of starts to agree. Is that, yeah, we're not just going to throw it out and be like, just try anything everybody. It's where we start to kind of give that, that a little bit of structure, and then we fade our supports over time, which we all agree is, you know, a great way to look at this. So I think when it comes to communication, kind of going back to your question, is that when we start to kind of like figure that out of what are the key elements or the key things we really want to make sure kids understand or know or can communicate in a more more structured way, I guess we can start to figure out, what are the response word, or what are the questions, or what are the yes, no responses, or what are the things we just want kids to do? And I don't care if you explain to me, I just want you to do it. And as I start to see you thinking through or trying different materials, that's when I start to realize you keep going to the fuzzy things. And the fuzzy is the attribute that you could have raised your hand and said fuzzy, or you could have used your assistive technology, but instead, I just watched you build and you used those materials that were fuzzy. And now I'm starting to make those connections that you understand properties and you understand the attributes, and you understand why you might be using those and so kind of that over dependency of language can really get in the way, especially for kids with more extensive support needs.

Rebecca Hines:

So, so Bree would, would you say that entry steps for teachers? Does that start with the task analysis? Does that start with breaking things down and looking at these, you know, these skills, all these things that people need to use, you know, whatever approach or obtain whatever content. Where does somebody who's just wrapping their mind around this start?

Bree Jimenez:

Yeah, it's, it's funny, because I'm in a, I'm in a place right now with some of the research we're doing on engineering, that's kind of got me rethinking a little bit of this. I think, generally speaking, yeah, breaking steps down. But I think one of the first things that's really, really helpful is for a teacher to first think about the lesson it is that they're doing, or the unit that they're going to teach, and then determine what are like the essential, you know, kind of the essential things, what are the critical things that kids need to know or be able to do? And so I would say, you know, thinking about, is there some math in here that's going to be really important, or is it going to be important that I have supports in there? Because right now is not the time I want to do a 20 minute lesson on how to measure something, but it's going to be a big part of them understanding something is longer or shorter, or heavier or lighter, in the concepts that they're going to build. And then I would start to think about, are there science concepts that need to be built into this lesson, and can I build them, and maybe they're earlier concepts, like we did this whole unit on solar ovens, and in order to do that, I needed to understand temperature. But I was working with a bunch of students who didn't know how to measure temperature using a thermometer. Didn't maybe even know that thermometer was the appropriate measurement tool. And so we specifically built these things into this, you know, sixth grade lesson. So, I think determining some of those kind of things. And then I think in the end, what is it that you care the kids get? Because, if not, and you don't prioritize what some of those outcomes you actually want them to measure, or the things that you're going to need to build in, and just prioritize a couple of those to make sure that we don't go down these weird rabbit holes where we're spending so much time on something that isn't even the essence of what that lesson or unit was supposed to be on. So, I think that's a really, really big one, and then breaking down the steps and looking for routines that kids could use every single day, and they could be generic. What are the things they're going to need?

Rebecca Hines:

So I if, if I could ask my my final question, considering you know your your view of this process, one which I share is, is this about skills at the end of the day? Is it about a student of any abilities access to the material, whether or not we can even evaluate how much of it he or she absorbs? Or do you think that there there are required skills for people to participate in this type of learning?

Bree Jimenez:

I don't think there's prerequisites. Definitely don't think there's prerequisites, but I do think that we have to, in good measure we are educators. It's not just about kids exploring and just playing. It's about kids going to school to gain skills. And I think that there are, I don't want to say levels, because that sounds, you know, kind of too hierarchical, but there are skills that we can build, and some kids are going to come with certain skills and some don't. And that is the same exact thing as any general education classroom lessons, student, it doesn't matter, all of our students are gaining different skills at different levels. And I think one of the big, big aha moments, though, for me, has been that it's the practices, it's the habits of mind, it's the this is where the metacognition kind of comes in, and this is the piece that is so exciting for me, because I think it is the true, tried value of special education, and always has been, which is the self determination, the communication, the initiation. But when we look at STEM education, there is so there are so many opportunities to build all of these in which makes the science and the math come alive in a very, very meaningful way. For all students, whether or not they're digging deeper into their science and mathematics, understanding and concepts, they're building the skills. So I think, like inquiry and engineering, they're similar. They're not the same, but they are such an exciting way for us to really think deeply about how to build the skills that are going to help our students continue to prosper and transition. And you know, my hopes are no data to support this yet, but is, it's the post school outcomes. I think that there are direct relationships, there should be, there will be direct relationships. We can map of post school outcomes for students who have high quality opportunities to engage in good STEM education through inquiry and engineering practices.

Lisa Dieker:

Well, and that's I mean again, I think that, you know, the mindset here is we all agree. And some beautiful things you said, and I think one of the words like that you said, and I really appreciate, was the word general-ed teacher. So my last question for you is I'm a general-ed teacher, maybe I'm mature, career changer. Didn't go to school with kids with extensive support needs. They weren't even in the building. I don't have any experience, and I'm a science teacher, and I don't know how to build a classroom culture, period. How do you suggest I think about maybe a couple of resources I would go to to start to build not only this inclusive mindset for me, but more importantly, we know a good STEM classroom has a culture of scientists working together and experience one of those cross-cutting standards. What would be some of your things you'd recommend to that new person who says, I want to do this. I just, I just don't have a toolkit to do it, and I maybe don't have a special-ed teacher my building prepared to do this either. So, I stand alone and say, yes, I'm ready. But where do I start to build that culture my classroom to make sure everybody learns successfully?

Bree Jimenez:

Yeah. So I think one of. The the superpowers is, if you know the content you want to teach, that's that's one of the superpowers of our general educators, even when we have great collaborative teams, is that we can't all be everything, but what it is is knowing exactly what it is that is the most important element, the essence of that lesson, and then from there, back mapping it, and not trying to do everything, all day long, through every lesson for every learner. I think that's one of the you know, we are. We have lofty goals, and we put a lot of pressure on ourselves as educators, but we have to recognize, you know, and so I kind of go back to Universal Design for Learning, and the most I can dig in that, and I know sometimes that is, you know, cast is a great resource for This, but I think it is UDL recognizing that UDL itself. It's a concept. It is. It's an idea of how we and we use different vehicles to get there. You know, it's this destination of creating more universally designed things. And so I think that's where, when I look at the essence, I look at the elements of exactly what it is that I want the student to get. So for example, I'm in a lesson, and there's, you know, the science concept I want them to get. But then there's also a couple of these skills, like being able to share my idea with the person next to me, which is a key element of group work, which is huge. And in you know, one of the staples of engineering education is being able to collaborate in groups and be able to share and compare and contrast. Well, if I could really work for a student, to be able to recognize what I want and be able to share that with a partner and listen to my partner, that would be huge. So, recognizing what are those skills you want, what is the content you want, and then those are the things that I put my time and my energy into. And I think, you know, getting to know some of the supports within universal design for learning that are kind of outlined, looking at the guidelines to get ideas of, oh, I already do this. Oh, this is something I could do. or, I think another, another support I would really think of, and maybe one that's underutilized, I think systematically, is peer supports. And looking to see what are the peer supports, and recognizing what do typical peers also do? Because I think also sometimes, when we think about students with disabilities, we set really high expectations, and sometimes they're higher than what we would even, you know, ask of their peers without disability. So, I think using peers cast, you know, through the UDL guidelines would be another one. I always everything, kind of always leads me back to explicit and systematic instruction. It always goes back to that. How do we use our peers? We help them implement explicit and systematic instruction? How do we really think about setting up our classrooms to be more universally designed? Often it goes back to breaking down tasks for everyone, which is a form of explicit instruction. So, I think also looking at maybe high leverage practices, looking at some of those things that could really help us engage our students more systematically and give our students routines within the class, or all students routines, so that they can start to build their knowledge and their skills and the content within the routine. The routines are the natural thing of how we inquire. You know, we ask questions. We do this all day long in routines like, what am I going to eat for dinner tonight versus, you know, what is? What do I need to get prepared for the rest of the week to what do I need to do during this inquiry lesson? So those routines are really big to build, and that allows our students, I think, to put the energy and time and brain power into learning the skills and implementing them, rather than learning a new routine every single day, or trying to figure out what it is that we're doing today that was so different than yesterday, but really that wasn't what you were trying to teach in the first place. And that can really overwhelm all of our students, I think, and allow us to kind of open up some of that opportunities for all students in a more universal way.

Lisa Dieker:

Yeah, and I love that, and thank you for, you know, reminding us that it's both the content and the social skills that we're all trying to learn every day in life, and I think school is no different. So, I love that summary for that Ginevra teacher. Well, we thank you for joining us, and if folks have questions for us, please send us a Tweet at Access Practical or send us a question on our Facebook page. Thank you again for. We really appreciate your expertise and the work you're doing in the field.

Bree Jimenez:

Great. Thank you so much for having me. It's great to talk with you.