etadd_47(3) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 1. Total number of procedural errors (represented by bars) on the target items committed by students (number above bars) from experimental and comparison group. group scored an average of 0 on the pretest and 10.20 on the posttest with a gain score of 10.20. A comparison of the gain scores between the comparison and experimental group using an ANOVA indicated that the differences on both target (F [1, 8] 1289.29, p .001) and generalization items (F [1, 8] 172.41, p .001) were statistically significant. In addition, students from the experimental group answered an average of 16.80 target items and 7.60 generalization items correctly on the maintenance probe. We also analyzed the types of errors participants made on both target and generalization items (see Figure 1 and 2). All five students in the comparison group made procedural errors on the target and generalization items, accounting for 100% of the total errors on the pre- and posttest. Similar error patterns occurred on both types of items on the pretest by all five students in the experimental group, accounting for 98% and 100% of the total errors on the target and generalization items. During posttest, students in the experimental group did not have any procedural errors on the target items and four of them had a procedural error on one of the generalization items. In addition, four students from the experimental group completed the target items on the maintenance probe without mak- 352 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-September 2012
Figure 2. Total number of procedural errors (represented by bars) on the generalization items committed by students (number above bars) from experimental and comparison group. ing any procedural errors. With regard to their completion of the generalization item on the maintenance probe, three students made errors due to lack of procedural knowledge. Discussion Learning how to calculate tip is a useful skill for young adults with disabilities. The TIP strategy addressed a common but important problem that young adults with disabilities were frequently encountering in postsecondary settings. At the time of the study, all of the participants were living on a university campus independently for the first time. Greater independence and change in their support network may have presented significant challenges for these students who lacked necessary functional money management skills in postsecondary settings (Hughes & Smith, 1990). For example, two of the most frequent ineffective tipping approaches described by the students at the beginning stages of strategy instruction were guessing and giving fixed amount of money as tip regardless of the total bill (e.g., always gave two dollars as a tip). All of the students acknowledged that the ineffec- Functional Mathematical Skill / 353
Page 1 and 2:
Education and Training in Autism an
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
ities. Scholars have argued that do
Page 9 and 10:
discussions were held with 12 addit
Page 11 and 12:
TABLE 1 A Sample of Community Funds
Page 13 and 14:
et al., 2007). At the school, stude
Page 15 and 16:
students opportunities to work and
Page 17 and 18:
Browder, D. M., & Cooper-Duffy, K.
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
of words, and in the short term wer
Page 23 and 24:
TABLE 3 Word Lists List No. Trainin
Page 25 and 26:
TABLE 6 Pairwise Comparisons on Pos
Page 27 and 28:
Word Identification or Word Attack
Page 29 and 30:
erate to severe disabilities. Excep
Page 31 and 32:
ess in a variety of subjects includ
Page 33 and 34:
TABLE 1 Target Vocabulary Words by
Page 35 and 36:
Figure 1. Example of PowerPoint Sli
Page 37 and 38:
TABLE 3 Mean Percentage of Correct
Page 39 and 40:
Figure 4. Jake’s percentages corr
Page 41 and 42:
man-Martin et al. (2005) by demonst
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
used in the study that did not foll
Page 47 and 48:
lected. Stories were read in a quie
Page 49 and 50:
y determining the number of interva
Page 51 and 52: with the removal of the interventio
Page 53 and 54: Accordingly, recent research has in
Page 55 and 56: Method Participants Four male child
Page 57 and 58: TABLE 2 Play Scale - Developmental
Page 59 and 60: elated utterances, which were used
Page 61 and 62: Figure 1. Ian’s Progress in Play
Page 63 and 64: Figure 3. Ryan’s Progress in Play
Page 65 and 66: Figure 5. Social Validity: Average
Page 67 and 68: (2000). A comparison of video model
Page 69 and 70: Education and Training in Autism an
Page 71 and 72: Method Participants Four high schoo
Page 73 and 74: TABLE 1 Task Analyses for all Tasks
Page 75 and 76: Figure 1. Holly multiple baseline g
Page 77 and 78: Figure 3. Norman multiple baseline
Page 79 and 80: ing at photographs. Jake only requi
Page 81 and 82: tion, some aspects of the target be
Page 83 and 84: table video aids may lead to greate
Page 85 and 86: TABLE 2 Task Analyses Including Vid
Page 87 and 88: table.” During the session, the t
Page 89 and 90: Figure 2. Percent of steps with err
Page 91 and 92: ter the 15 th session. With table w
Page 93 and 94: our students, it may have been diff
Page 97 and 98: TABLE 2 Participants Demographic Da
Page 99 and 100: opening of the lesson, the teacher
Page 101: TABLE 4 Total Number of Items Answe
Page 105 and 106: serve both cognitive (e.g., self in
Page 107 and 108: and quasi-experimental designs for
Page 111 and 112: & Cobb, 2002). Generalization, the
Page 113 and 114: academic activities in the classroo
Page 115 and 116: Procedure Baseline. In this multipl
Page 117 and 118: condition for each student. With th
Page 119 and 120: was repeated across all participant
Page 121 and 122: Boning, R. A. (1997). SRA Specific
Page 125 and 126: TABLE 1 Student demographic informa
Page 127 and 128: ping, dining out, voting) and diffe
Page 129 and 130: TABLE 2 Content Standards, Alternat
Page 131 and 132: Student Achievement Figures 3-6 pro
Page 133 and 134: Figure 4. Student data across math
Page 135 and 136: Figure 6. Student data across math
Page 137 and 138: A second limitation of the current
Page 141 and 142: y students with intellectual disabi
Page 143 and 144: TABLE 1 Studies of Mathematics Inte
Page 145 and 146: subject design to provide an interv
Page 147 and 148: Neef and colleagues (2003) demonstr
Page 149 and 150: abilities. Education and Training i
show all

etadd_47(3) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?