dc.description.abstract | Background
Recent studies indicate that learners with Down syndrome can become competent bilinguals and biliterates. However, less is known about whether immersion education is a suitable and beneficial education setting for these learners, as previous studies have included participants from bilingual home backgrounds rather than students who acquire additional languages through school programmes.
Aims
This study aimed to investigate whether there were differences in the verbal communication of pupils with Down syndrome who attend English-medium mainstream (EMM), English-medium special setting (EMSS) and Irish-medium mainstream (IMM) primary schools. Additionally, the study aimed to gather the views of these students, and their parents, regarding their experiences of primary school.
Sample
Fifty-four participants took part in Phase One, including children with Down syndrome (n = 5), parents of children with Down syndrome (n = 12), and professionals currently working with children with Down syndrome (n = 37). Phase Two participants included 13 children with Down syndrome attending EMM (n = 4), EMSS (n = 5) and IMM (n = 4) primary schools, and 13 parents linked to child participants.
Methods
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with parent participants to gather information about their experiences and their child’s verbal communication development. The Mosaic approach, including use of cameras and picture-story activities, was employed to investigate the experiences of child participants.
Results
Parental interviews highlighted the influence of bioecological factors on verbal communication. There were no significant differences between the verbal communication abilities of child participants attending EMM, EMSS and IMM schools. Themes regarding parental experiences included choosing a primary school, parental responsibilities and fostering inclusion and facilitating success at school. Children’s experiences revolved around learning, relationships, places and fun activities at school.
Conclusions
The implications of the findings for professional practice and research are presented, alongside unanticipated ethical dilemmas which arose during the study. | en_US |