Description of graphical content is included between Description Start and Description End. Transcript Start [ Music ] [ Title: ] International O&M Online Symposium Welcome (in multiple languages0 [ Title: ] Research Supported Framework for Developing Paraprofessional In-Service Trainings in O&M Nicholas Casias: I would like to start by speaking about myself. I am a certified Orientation and Mobility Specialist. In Southern California. I'm an itinerant teacher, meaning that I travel from school site to school site. And I serve students across five separate school districts. In a geographic region that borders Arizona and Nevada. Wonderful San Bernadino county. What I have come to understand is that each district does their own thing. They have different personalities, different cultures, different personnel, and especially different means of addressing paraprofessional supports assigned to their students. In my experience here in Southern California in the county of San Bernadino paraprofessional supports have been assigned to students with visual impairments, regardless of their O&M capabilities. I have many independent travelers that are assigned a paraprofessional support under the premise or concern of liability and safety. While I'm not advocating for paraprofessional supports to be attached to students with O&M services, I am attempting to address an area of need in both paraprofessional in‑service training as well as take advantage of the resources available to me and to many other practitioners in the field who have access to these paraprofessional supports to support and supplant the O&M instruction they're providing. Another unique experience that I've had here in San Bernadino county is during my first year of teaching, I had the wonderful experience of participating in a due process hearing and by a show of the chat box, has anyone else in their teaching career experienced a due process hearing? Someone is in the process of the due process hearing. They're in the middle of it. My expectation is to see a lot of nos. There's many teachers who go their entire illustrious career without ever experiencing a due process hearing. So I'm going to give a little insight into the definition of a due process hearing. It's a formal hearing, a formal legal procedure that resolves differences about special education services for your student, with the goal to ensure a free and appropriate public education, tailored to your student's unique needs. The ‑‑ concerning eligibility place services and/or supports for your students. Both the parent and the school district have the right to file for a due process hearing to resolve a dispute. In 2005, the US Supreme Court decided that the party who files the due process complaint has the burden of providing ‑‑ excuse me, proving whether the child's rights are being protected or whether the individualized educational program, IEP, is appropriate. I see Debra commenting how due process is not fun. I absolutely agree. It's the end result of a failed mediation between the district or the SOPA and the family and it results in a formal court hearing where every goal and every aspect of service, placement and the student's IEP, educational program, is scrutinized, evaluated and questioned. During my first year as an Orientation and Mobility Specialist, I inherited a student who had a due process hearing attached. And I found myself in the position of supporting ‑‑ of attempting to provide support for every aspect of my O&M service. Many times the only answer that I could offer as to why something was done or something was not done was to say that it was based on the clinical expertise of the credentialed teacher. And it left me wanting more, more support for the instruction that I was providing, more support for why I wrote goals in a specific manner, more support for service times that I offered, more support for every aspect of the O&M service model that I focused on, separate from based on my experience in class, based on my experience as a teacher with three months under my belt. And, yes, I see Debra commenting how everything is put under a microscope. That's neither here nor there, I just wanted to give some background to why, all of a sudden, I became highly interested in research supported method, best practices and essentially legally defensible justification for why we do or do not do something within the field of O&M. Further background, in the state of California, we have guidelines regarding VI programs. They're great guidelines. The purpose of the guidelines were developed as a resource for families, staff, administrators in assessing, identifying, planning, providing, evaluating and improving the quality and cost effectiveness of programs serving students with visual impairments. A lot of time, money and effort have been placed into these 259 pages that I came ‑‑ that I have come to find aren't ‑‑ considered merely suggestions, and in fact can be ignored. It was very disappointing to told by administrators and by other members of the IEP team, including lawyers and advocates, that guidelines were nothing more than that. Guidelines. And I believe each state has their own set of guidelines that adhere programs servicing students with visual impairments. So from this point on, program and policy have become my passion. And because of this fair hearing court procedural experience, it shaped my thought process in regards to the instruction that I provide, where I'm always asking myself why and how is this the best way to do this or what support or reason is out there to validate the decision. We're going to move to the next slide there. Okay. So three total outcomes for this presentation. My hope is that there's more, but at the bare minimum, if I could have you leaving away with these three, then I've done my job. I want you, the participant, to be versed in key themes from the literature that address the need for paraprofessional in‑service training development. I want to introduce you to a study near and dear to my heart that resulted in a framework or template for paraprofessional in‑service training development. Last but not least, I want to empower you, the practitioner, with the tools to develop your own framework for paraprofessional in‑service training. What I'm attempting to do here is to take a researched dissertation and compile it into a 20 slide PowerPoint, I think that you will see that it's very tangible and applicable to those itinerant service model providers in the field. To start off my research, I had to do a review of the literature. There's some quality, quality, quality O&M literature, spanning more than 30 years. And an immediate theme that emerged is the concept of role release. Based on the chat box here, I would like to see if anyone is familiar from their own practitioner based programs with the concept of role release. The numbers seem to be split. For every yes, I'm seeing a no. For every no, I'm seeing a yes. So that's good. I'm excited that I can shed some light on the theme of role release. The Orientation and Mobility Specialist can role release many components, such as teaching others how to facilitate items that will add to later O&M instruction, develop strategies for adults to incorporate consistent terminology and routine and to monitor and provide feedback for the other adults as they provide intervention. A further review of the literature has indicated that the Orientation and Mobility Specialist may role release some basic instructional duties. This includes monitoring route travel to any individual who interacts with the student on a daily basis. Jacobson in 1993 in his original O&M text suggested that in the schools, the classroom teacher, teacher of the visually impaired, teachers aide ‑‑ So we're going to talk about role release, we are talking about all the way back in 1993, Jacob recommended that ‑‑ that others teaching assistants, nursing aides, can provide practice in drills in certain techniques or procedures within the realm of O&M. And then we also talked about that sometimes the teacher and an aide provide primary instruction of basic mobility cane skills if time and situations permit. And we talked about how even a student's peers are all capable of reinforcing the skills that the student has acquired. Jacobsen went further on to discuss that involving others in the O&M lessons is highly important and he specifically stated that a student at a public school may have a teacher's aide who not only helps him or her with the assignment, but guides them to various places throughout the school. Because the mobility instructor can only be with the student for brief periods of time during the day or week, sometimes months, it is necessary for others to be involved in the lessons to varying degrees to insure consistency and continuity between formal lessons. The next key themes from the literature are related to the role and responsibilities of the Orientation and Mobility Specialist. We as Orientation and Mobility Specialists have a very unique position in that we're more than just an educator. As many teachers are. We're more than just a teacher. We can be a family and community educator, we can be a consultant, we end up being therapists. In the chat box, does anyone have any other descriptions for how they would describe their role within the context of their organization? Or the role they play for their students? Counselors, that's a great one. Community advocate. Ride home after the lesson. [ Laughter ]. Taxi service. Driver. I love it. I really appreciate everyone's engagement and responses, it's great to see. Yep, I'm a Starbucks connoisseur at this point in time. Think students that I have think O&M, they immediately start planning their Starbucks order because I'm their Starbucks uber or Lyft driver. Planning consultant, that's a good one. Okay. I appreciate all of the responses. So that means that it's important to note that the literature has highlighted that the Orientation and Mobility Specialist wears many, many, many hats. One in particular we are both family and community educators. The Orientation and Mobility Specialist is responsible for designing and implementing ongoing in‑service education activities and orientation and mobility for teachers, other professionals, paraprofessionals, administrators, parents and consumers. I recognize that many times we spend a vast majority of our service time simply identifying and explaining what orientation and mobility is and isn't. How many of you have had that shared experience of spending a considerable amount of time highlighting how you're not the occupational therapist and you're not the physical therapist or that you are not there to take the student for a walk? Good. I see my experience aligns with many of yours. Jaye, over and over again with the same people. Very true, it's a constant effort. Constant effort. So as we were looking at earlier, the Orientation and Mobility Specialist, according to the literature, is responsible for designing and implementing ongoing service ‑‑ but the chat box, how many of you have designed or created your own in‑service education activity for teachers, paraprofessionals, administrators, parents? Great, love it, all the time, yes, yes, yes blind folds and all. How many of you were trained or instructor or received literature in regard to best practices or what topics to cover specifically to ensure consensus and clarity for your student? I imagine we all had autonomy and freedom to design our own, based on our own clinical experience and the needs of ‑‑ clinical experience and the needs of the student. I myself got plenty of support from Cal State university in regards to providing human guide and many other aspects that I believe would be well versed and important to place in an in‑service training for another member for the student's IEP team. That being said, I found that other than going through that fair hearing process, other than indicating based on my clinical experience and my credentialing experience, that this was not enough to stand as legally defensible in the due process and/or fair hearing process. Essentially, if I were to highlight what I had deemed was the five most important things that I covered, another O&M could come in and highlight five completely different things and there would be no consensus or clarity in regards to who was more accurate or more correct. It was left to the discretion of the practitioner. And something that I have learned in my experience is that without consensus and clarity, you really don't have to have ‑‑ you don't have a leg to stand on. So this was definitely the catalyst to move forward with my research. Another role that the O&M plays, again key themes from the literature and others have already highlighted this is both instructor and consultant. As a consultant, an Orientation and Mobility Specialist, there's that word again, may role release some basic instructional duties, for example monitoring route travel to a teacher, parent or paraprofessional who interacts with the student on a daily basis. Again, putting on my lawyer in a fair hearing hat, I would ask tell me about that monitoring of route travel, what parameters and established routines and how did you create them? And what documentation do you have to support that the route travel you generated and the route travel training that you provided or role released to the teacher, the parent or the paraprofessional was the most appropriate and beneficial for that student? I didn't have the answers. I can be very candid with you. These answers were very hard for me to come by during that fair hearing process. I'm seeing some great points in the chat box. I see presentations need to be almost custom‑made, depending on the audience. That's a great point. There is not going to be one size fits all answer. Just like for our IEPs that we draft and for each unique and individual student. We have to start from somewhere. From a framework or a template. But we're always going to be modifying and adjusting based on the individual needs. So we have moved past key themes from the literature, again they were the different roles and responsibilities that the Orientation and Mobility Specialist plays within the itinerant service delivery model. We came across this unique concept of role release, which essentially is a trans disciplinary approach to providing instruction to our students where we as the O&M specialist would be responsible for triangulating and coordinating service to basic O&M skills to other members of the IEP team to make sure that that student had facilitated opportunities to practice through rote repetition specific routes or maybe basic cane skills, because we as the O&M cannot be there all day every day and for that individual student, from the moment they wake up to the moment they go to sleep, they are practicing mobility with cane in hand, without cane in hand. They are using and incorporating their orientation and mobility skills. Through the concept of role release, we have a better opportunity to ‑‑ to support the students. I am seeing some questions that I want to address. Asking about O&M assistant handouts. And I will take this moment to clarify that I am not discussing when I say paraprofessional supports, O&M assistants. O&M assistant is a separate aspect, something that was explored in our past in regards to training of paraprofessional through an agency or potentially a university. And that is not the same thing as having a paraprofessional support who has been assigned to a student by the district, who is providing support for many aspects of the student's needs. Something a little bit different and I would want to clarify that ‑‑ that that's something separate. And I see a lot of great questions coming out from Dana Powell and others, I will try to answer those towards the end. We have moved on to purpose of the study. The purpose of this study that I conducted was to examine in detail the roles and responsibilities of paraprofessionals. It was specifically within the public school system and it had to do with itinerant orientation and mobility service delivery model and the effort was to influence and develop in‑service training and supervision methods. The recommendations came from expert practitioners like yourself in the field. Similar to the way that we have those commercials where they say 10 out of 11 dentists recommend the following. The thought process was through a survey of the experts, we could have 10 out of 11 Orientation and Mobility Specialists recommending the following to influence and develop in‑service training and supervision methods. So I owe a lot to those dental commercials. Essentially, when you draft a study, it's to address a research problem that was highlighted within the research. And the problem that I observed was that paraprofessionals who work with students with disabilities are one of the fastest growing groups of workers in the United States. And even the individuals ‑‑ the IDEA does not address the paraprofessional's role. It does specify that paraprofessionals be provided with training and supervision. It further highlights that paraprofessionals must be appropriately trained and supervised in accordance with state law regulations or written policy. Likewise it requires a comprehensive system of professional development, including training of paraprofessionals. However, few states have yet to address the training and credentialing of paraprofessionals. Furthermore the growing use of paraprofessionals in supporting the education of students with disabilities have actually outpaced the ability to clearly define the roles, training and supervision need. Interestingly enough, roles and responsibilities are still one of the most frequently researched areas related to paraprofessionals in special education. Far less research has been conducted on paraprofessionals who work with our students. Students with disabilities. Students with visual impairments, excuse me. The involvement of paraprofessionals with such students has been discussed as a potentially rich resource of personnel in a field with chronic personnel shortages. However, it must be noted that paraprofessionals are often hired by administrators to solve this paraprofessional problem and that is not something that I am advocating or recommending in any way, shape or form. I want to put that out there on the table now. That is not the intention or the purpose of this study or this presentation. Last but not least, though, research has demonstrated the strong need for more formal approach to training paraprofessionals who work with students who are visually impaired. And although paraprofessionals should not be trained to replace teachers of students with visual impairments, they do require intense and specific training to perform their daily job function of providing instructional support. And I do believe topics should span across basic teaching techniques to specific instructional techniques related to the Expanded Core Curriculum, ie, orientation and mobility. So the importance of the study are why I believe the study was important is that again it addresses the need for a more formal approach to training paraprofessionals. I believe that in a survey of the research, that part of the O&M's roles and responsibilities includes an expected focus on providing said training and supervision regarding role release, O&M skills to individuals who interact with students daily. And I believe that future research should involve comparable surveys and studies with a larger statewide or nation‑wide population sample to canvas a greater representation of the O&M field. I'm going to pause for a second and I'm seeing how individuals are linking the visit as a tool to show why you need to role release to the paraprofessionals, family and teachers. I see that like myself, I cannot be here 24 hours a day to reinforce skills with students. That is where you are so important. I feel like they hear me saying I just want to give them more work to do. Sharisse Roberts you are bringing some great points. And I'm excited to see that. Many people think that's a great idea. So the methodology of the study essentially is how the student was conducted, how did I get to this framework or template for paraprofessional in‑service training. I used the Delphi Study. Again, it's that dental 10 out of 11 experts recommend where they respond to a survey of several rounds to create consensus on one or more issues. Research recommended the use of a Delphi Study method whenever consensus is needed from persons who are knowledgeable about a particular subject. And I believe that no one is more knowledgeable than you, the expert practitioner, out there in the field providing daily service and no one is more knowledgeable about the specific needs of your student caseload, of your geographic region, district, SOPA or otherwise that you are servicing, that's why I think that everyone's framework or template may in fact end up being highly unique to their specific student and personnel needs. By requiring continuous commitment through several rounds of surveys, the Delphi method introduces respondents to be more thoughtful than does a single round survey. In the literature, Delphi has been applied to various fields such as program planning, needs assessment, policy determination, and resource utilization. The Delphi method specifically indicates or can ‑‑ can be used to specifically indicate and achieve the following objectives. To determine and develop a range of possible program alternatives. To explore or expose underlying assumptions or information leading to different judgments. To seek out information which may generate a consensus, which is what I was interested in, on the part of the respondent group. To correlate informed judgments on a topic spanning a wide range of disciplines and to educate the respondent group as to the diverse and inter‑related aspects of the topic. So the process for my survey involved two rounds of online surveys and they were presented to expert practitioners. The first survey consisted of three questions and it allowed for the surveys to be filled out in detail for their responses. Then the data was reviewed and analyzed. The second survey consisted of those aggregated responses and subsequently the participants rank the different responses in the order of most important to least important. From there the respondents were interviewed post‑survey. The interviews were recorded and the data was coded and through the interviews there was a list of key themes that emerged that resulting essentially in the framework that we're going to explore next. Just to clarify and make sure, we didn't just pick any random Orientation and Mobility Specialist, although that would have been fine for the purpose of adding validity to the study we wanted expert practitioners. We needed to have O&Ms who specialized or who supervised paraprofessionals who worked with students with visual impairments in public schools. They needed to have a minimum of three years of teaching experience. These Orientation and Mobility Specialists had an on average 10 to 20 years of teaching experience in the field. Second, these Orientation and Mobility Specialists spanned across the entire region of Southern California. Kern County, Los Angeles county, Orange County, Riverside county, and Imperial County, San Bernadino county. They went into the central companies of San Luis Obispo, to canvass a large portion of the Southern California population to ensure that we are getting everyone represented and we were able to do that which was highly exciting and a big thanks to those orientation and mobility specialists who were willing to respond. We're getting to the meat of it here. Prior to this research question I want to go over the instrumentation of the study. I also wants to give thanks to the Southern California Association of Orientation and Mobility Specialists. All of the participants were identified through that chapter. And all of the participants were credentialed Orientation and Mobility Specialists in the state of California. They not only had a clinical rehabilitative service credential in orientation and mobility issued through the teach credentialing office here in California, but they also had their ACVREP certification, so they were both state credentialed as well as nationally or internationally, I should say, credentialed Orientation and Mobility Specialists. And as far as the instrumentation of the study, again, it was emailed surveys consisting of open ended questions. The open ended questionnaire served as the cornerstone of soliciting specific information about a content area. The ‑‑ the respondents generated on average 20 responses each. 20 point ranking scale was attributed to each response to determine consensus. And last but not least, post‑interview was conducted to go over the respondent's different responses to understand their thought processes as to why they answered the way they did. And that was highly revealing and probably more important than a simple check on a box or a simple ranking of a skill on a checklist, you know. It was the interviews that ‑‑ that really got down to the nitty‑gritty. What you see on the screen right now is the first of three research questions that guided the study. What do Orientation and Mobility Specialists report are the roles and responsibilities of paraprofessionals? Who work with students who are visually impaired. You're going to see here the top three responses. These are the top three agreed upon responses for the roles and responsibilities of the paraprofessional support. Almost ‑‑ 10 out of 11 O&Ms said the No. 1 role of that paraprofessional is to ensure the student's safety on campus. The second highest ranked response was to support the drafted O&M IEP goals. So when the ‑‑ on whatever IEP system you use, there's usually a box for persons responsible for the implementation and the success of the O&M IEP goal. These O&M responses were indicating that the paraprofessional would be included as one of the members responsible for the successful completion of that IEP goal. The third most common response or agreed upon response was to reinforce O&M skills on campus. I think it's important that every O&M highlighted that a paraprofessional support was only involved in the reinforcement of skills on campus. At no point in time was off campus instruction brought up or recommended to involve a paraprofessional support. Some lower level ranked responses for the roles and responsibilities for Orientation and Mobility Specialists was minimal interaction, simply to shadow. Also low level ranked response, reinforce concept development. And another low level response was ‑‑ provide human guide. Interesting. Again, these were just responses and how they were ranked. What's more important is the themes that emerged later from the interviews. We're getting into something here. We have these terms monitor and reinforce. This was very interesting. In the interviews, the theme of monitor versus reinforce constantly arose. The six interviews that were conducted juxtaposed the level of involvement that the paraprofessional played in support of instruction. So monitoring was defined as involving only observation of the student by the paraprofessional and subsequent reporting to the Orientation and Mobility Specialist about the student's progress. Reinforcement, however, is defined as involving observation of the student by the paraprofessional, subsequent reporting to the Orientation and Mobility Specialist about the student's progress, and could include correct and/or ‑‑ correction and/or redirection should the observed skill be appropriate. That was the clear distinction between monitoring and reinforcement. Some of the O&Ms gravitated to the school of thought that the paraprofessional's role was solely to monitor. That they were to observe and to report. They were essentially the security guard of the situation where they can observe and report. However should there be something that was not deemed appropriate or that was not aiding to the progress of the student, they were leaving that to the O&M or the O&M felt it was solely the O&M's responsibility to get involved in the correction and/or redirection of the skill. Other O&Ms when interviewed were all about the observation, the reporting and did feel that the paraprofessional support could get involved with correction and/or redirection and they highlighted that correction and redirection is not the same thing as direct instruction. Any new concept or skill was ‑‑ was solely provided and instructed by a certified Orientation and Mobility Specialist. And no ‑‑ no correction and/or redirection from a paraprofessional could occur without direct instruction provided to that paraprofessional by the certified Orientation and Mobility Specialist. Down here at the bottom you will see effective monitoring of a skill by a paraprofessional requires that the paraprofessional be knowledgeable about the appropriate skill. However, there would be no correction and/or no redirection should the observed skill be inappropriate. Kassandra is asking about citations. And I will absolutely do so. We will make it a point to get all of those citations, if not the dissertation in its entirety available. And then on the right side of the screen, we see effective reinforcing of a skill by a paraprofessional requires the paraprofessional to be both knowledgeable about the appropriate skill and possess the ability to display the skill accurately. That's a much higher level of paraprofessional support or involvement, a much higher level of paraprofessional support or competency; therefore, it's going to require a much higher level of paraprofessional in‑service training. Which takes us to our next slide when reiterates the point. If you are going to have your paraprofessional involved in direct correction or intervention, this essentially intensifies the level of involvement and support of the paraprofessional and subsequently the amount of ‑‑ of paraprofessional in‑service training required. So on the left‑hand side of the framework you are going to see monitoring only. If you are only focused on having your paraprofessional monitor, it would look like this: They would monitor and proper cane mechanics, they would report concerns or progress to the O&M. They would be responsible for promoting independence, there would be minimal interaction as possible, they would simply serve as a shadow, their role or responsibility was still there to ensure student safety and route travel consistency. On the right‑hand side, you will see reinforcement, which would include the direct correction or intervention. On this side if they are reinforcing the O&M skills on campus, proper cane mechanics on campus, concept development, skills taught on campus and concepts and techniques only after receiving training and by that we mean only after the student has received training by a certified O&M and the paraprofessional received training by a certified O&M. They are still providing human guide. They are capable of providing feedback to the students. And they are actually facilitating opportunities for the student to practice O&M goals on campus. They are supporting those O&M goals. They are assisting the student in the classroom, they are capable and able to demonstrate proper human guide and this is not that the paraprofessional to demonstrate proper human guide, with the student, but this paraprofessional can in turn train any other individual how to appropriately display and demonstrate proper human guide. Many times the paraprofessional supports in my district take days off as they should or have been with the student for many years and find themselves in a situation where they're being rotated or the student is receiving a new paraprofessional assigned to them. And both myself and the paraprofessional who is involved in the reinforcement can provide in‑service training to the new individual coming in to play a supportive role and that paraprofessional is essential in addressing some of the nuances, having worked with the student on a daily basis. I do see 15 minutes and I appreciate that. Of course the paraprofessional is still encouraging mobility cane usage. Second research question was what do Orientation and Mobility Specialists report are the training needs, what are the training needs? And the top three responses are every paraprofessional support needs to be versed in human guide. Every paraprofessional support needs to understand the basic cane skills. The difference between two point touch and constant contact. I see what Jaye is talking about over here, I appreciate that, Jaye. Of course basic orientation skills. Landmark, difference between a landmark and something that's a clue. Every Orientation and Mobility Specialist felt that these were the top three results or training needs for a paraprofessional support assigned to a student. Down here you're going to see another theme that emerged in the interview process. In the interview there was the thought of O&M specific or special education related. O&M specific training needs were defined as subject matter unique to the field of O&M and would subsequently require a credentialed O&M to provide the training. Only a credentialed O&M could provide the training. And these types of training needs would only serve a paraprofessional specifically within the context of supporting O&M needs. On the flip side of that coin, others thought that special education related training needs were defined as subject matter that are more general and common across multiple disciplines. This brought up the thought that there could be collaboration among the VI teacher, the [indiscernible] mod teacher, APE teaching in provide in service and trainings to paraprofessional supports to address O&M specific and more general special education related training needs. Another wonderful opportunity for collaboration and providing a trans disciplinary approach for the benefit of our students. The second framework that I know everyone is interested in is highlighted here and we note that a focus on O&M specific and special education‑related training needs will increase the volume of subject matter that you'll need to cover in your in service or training. If you wanted to stick with solely O&M specific, you would look to the left and see human guide, basic cane skills, basic orientation skills, basic visual skills, blindisms, et cetera. And important to note that the tiers or the columns the way they are listed is the top three roles are at the top. And the least ‑‑ the roles ‑‑ the specific subject matter deemed least important at the bottom. If one thought this was too much training to be conducted at one in service, they could span it out across time, starting with human guide all the way down to an occlusion experience at the end of their training. Or they could mix and match. If you wanted to pull from more general special education related, encourage independence, levels of prompting, promoting problem solving, anyone based on their clinical expertise, any O&M could draw from either column, either side. They could cover it all or mix and match to meet the specific needs of the O&M goals they were trying to support of the personnel they are working with and of the student. With 10 minutes remaining, we get to the third and final research question that was answered. What do Orientation and Mobility Specialist report are the supervision needs, this is where we got the most consensus and clarity from. Regular and ongoing contact and support with the O&M was the desired supervision need of paraprofessional supports. Followed by consistent communication with the O&M. And subsequently supervision and monitoring by O&M to ensure student safety on campus. The greatest area of consensus or agreement amongst the experts was simply in what not to do. Every O&M respondent believed that to provide no supervision to the paraprofessional support assigned to their student would be the worst thing to do. The second worst thing to do, every ‑‑ 10 out of 11 Orientation and Mobility Specialists agreed to have an administrator such as a principal, an on‑site principal be the supervisor would be the second worst thing to do. They were not confident in their administrators having the specialized knowledge to address O&M‑related concerns or processes. And then, third, staff supervision such as home room teacher or a classroom teacher was listed as something not to do. We wanted to keep it within the O&M community. Keep consistent communication with the credentialed O&M as part of the supervision process. Themes that emerged in the interviews were again that the O&M being responsible for supervision or that if the O&M was not comfortable taking on the supervisory role, many O&Ms did address that they did not like the term supervision. They did not feel that supervision was the role for them to play. That ‑‑ that they voiced that I don't supervise anybody and they therefore felt it should be another member of the IEP team being responsible. We came to the belief that the in‑service model or training framework could then be used to provide instruction to whatever member that O&M felt should be responsible for supervision of the paraprofessional supports. However, most O&Ms agreed that supervision by the O&M was the desired or preferred way to go. I do have some recommendations to move forward for us practitioners. And that's that we should simply use the results of the study as only a framework or a template for developing and modifying your own paraprofessional in‑service training. I see someone asking about getting a copy of the questions. I will absolutely share the survey responses, as well as the whole framework for using those survey responses, all of the different rounds, to get your own unique template or framework. That is my intention, so, Kathy, we will do that. Use the results of this study for modifying and developing your own paraprofessional in‑service training. You yourself are going to have to ask the question about what level of intensity, what role and what level of responsibility are you going to place on your paraprofessional, depending on your student, the situation, the personnel, are they only going to be monitoring or are they going to be reinforcing in your own itinerant service delivery model. You have to decide whether you are going to adopt a supervisory role or not. If you are comfortable taking on that supervisory role or if you feel that someone else on the IEP team would be better off, that's something that you're going to have to ask yourself. I see Joni here discussing the training for Orientation and Mobility Specialist developed by William Wiener and Everett Hill developed in 1990. Again, orientation and mobility assistant was a separate venture within the field of O&M. What we're addressing here is in‑service training for paraprofessional supports assigned to students or not necessarily O&M assistants. I can probably go on for all day with this. I do want to give five minutes for questions. And, also, for clarification. If anyone has some burning questions. But thank you so much for the opportunity to do so. Multiple ... well, thank you, Brenda, thank you, Summer, thank you Paul there. Again, I feel the best thing that I can do is to get in the hands as many practitioners as possible the survey templates. I will give you the full break down of all of the responses with the weighted scores. I would like to give you access to the interview questions that were used. The more resources that I can extend your way that you can take and then adopt and address and modify. I also have some different variations of the framework or the templates for your in‑service trainings. The way they were presented here was for spacing. The way they are presented, they can be presented differently much more palatable and I would go ahead and do that as well. Sheila Walker is asking how we will get these resources, I envision that TSBVI will play a role in that. I will generate and create them, send them off to TSBVI and I'm sure that they have your email and contact information to disseminate accordingly. I'm excited to hear this World of Candy Mp3 track that looks like it's ready to play on the screen. Thank you for the opportunity to close out this groundbreaking O&M event, thank you Kassy and all of the participants for making this possible. [ Title: ] International O&M Online Symposium Thank you [ Music ] Fade to black.