etadd_47(3) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLE 5 Social Validity Questions for the Teacher Pre Is auditory comprehension difficult for your students? Pre What types of interventions have you used to help your students comprehend what they hear? Pre What seems to work best? Pre Do picture symbols help your students understand things they hear? Pre How often is auditory comprehension important for your students throughout their day? Pre What kind of stories do your students like? Post Did the picture symbols and discussion seem to help your students understand things that they heard? Post What do you think of this as an intervention? Post Is it effective? Post Is it practical? Post Would you use it in the classroom? Post What modifications would you make? Post Where the stories appropriate for your students? Why? Post What did you think about the use of multiple choice as a test of comprehension? Note. Pre questions asked prior to the study, Post questions asked following the study were considered disagreements. Reliability was calculated by the sum of agreements divided by the sum of the agreements plus disagreements and multiplied by 100. Interobserver agreement for all students in both the baseline and intervention phase was 100%. Due to the simplicity of observation of the dependent variable no disagreements were recorded. Treatment fidelity was measured during the intervention sessions through the observations of a classroom paraprofessional to confirm the correct use of the intervention procedures. As the researcher conducted intervention sessions, the paraprofessional recorded completion of each step on a procedural checklist (see Table 6). An average of 36% of the intervention sessions with a range of 33–44% among students were monitored for treatment fidelity. Treatment fidelity was calculated by the sum of completed steps di- TABLE 6 Procedural Fidelity Checklist 1 Present Picture strip 2 Ask student what he/she sees 3 Comment/discuss each picture 4 Read story 5 Comment/discuss each picture 6 Ask comprehension question 1 7 Point to letter choice while naming answer options 8 Allow student 10 seconds to respond; If no response, repeat question and wait 10 more seconds. If still no response, ask if student wants to continue (student may verbally say or point to answer). 9 Ask comprehension question 2 10 Point to letter choice while naming answer options 11 Allow student 10 seconds to respond; If no response, repeat question and wait 10 more seconds. If still no response, ask if student wants to continue (student may verbally say or point to answer). 12 Ask comprehension question 3 13 Point to letter choice while naming answer options 14 Allow student 10 seconds to respond; If no response, repeat question and wait 10 more seconds. If still no response, ask if student wants to continue (student may verbally say or point to answer). 15 Ask comprehension question 4 16 Point to letter choice while naming answer options 17 Allow student 10 seconds to respond; If no response, repeat question and wait 10 more seconds. If still no response, ask if student wants to continue (student may verbally say or point to answer). vided by the sum of the completed steps plus incomplete steps multiplied by 100. For all sessions documented, treatment fidelity was 100%. Due to the simplicity of the procedure, no disagreements were recorded. Results Figure 1 illustrates the overall effectiveness of the intervention on comprehension of the typical age-appropriate stories. Visual analysis revealed repeated gains in reading comprehension from the baseline to intervention 366 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-September 2012
condition for each student. With the exception of a few sessions, baseline remained stable or exhibited downward trending. Intervention indicated stability or upward trending across all students. Figure 1. Comprehension Accuracy across Participants. Louis. Louis’s baseline remained at and below 50% accuracy with a downward trend and an overall average of 42% accuracy on comprehension questions. With the introduction of intervention, this level rapidly in- Comprehension of Typical Texts / 367
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 and 102: TABLE 4 Total Number of Items Answe
Page 103 and 104: Figure 2. Total number of procedura
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: Procedure Baseline. In this multipl
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?