etadd_47(3) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

More documents

Recommendations

Info

the student to successfully make instant pudding, while the other targeted words allowed the student to create an English muffin pizza. During the teacher-directed condition, Kyle and Joe learned functional words for completing the pudding task while Jake learned the words for completing the pizza task. During the computer-assisted condition, Kyle and Joe learned the words for completing the pizza task whereas Jake learned the words for completing the pudding task. Table 1 lists students by conditions. Students participated in both instructional conditions until 90% or higher accuracy was achieved for three consecutive sessions in each condition. The instructional condition that resulted in the student reaching criterion in fewer sessions is referred to as the preferred CTD strategy. Data were collected using event recording and permanent product recoding procedures. All sessions were audio taped for the purposes of response verification, interobserver reliability and procedural integrity. During the teacher-directed CTD, the interning teacher recorded the number of functional sight words read correctly and number of words read incorrectly. During the computer-assisted CTD condition, student responses were audio taped and scored for correctness later. The number of functional sight words read correctly was divided by the total number of words presented to calculate the percentage of accuracy. Teacher-directed CTD. During teacher-directed CTD, each student was presented 11 words per session on flashcards that contained the word along with a picture representing the word (e.g., “pour” contained a picture of a hand pouring from a pitcher). Each teacherdirected session began with the teacher saying, “Let’s practice reading,” followed by the teacher reminding students, “Remember if you do not know what the answer is, wait and I will tell you.” During the first teacher-directed session, a 0-sec delay was implemented in which the teacher presented the card, ensured a look response, and said “What’s the word?” The correct response was modeled immediately followed by, “What’s the word?’ to solicit student practice. During subsequent sessions, the teacher began the session as described, but silently counted to 4-second between saying, “What’s the word?” and modeling the correct response. To keep the conditions similar, all student responses resulted in modeling of the correct response and time for student to practice the correct response. After every two words were presented, the teacher told the students “Remember if you do not know what the answer is, wait and I will tell you.” Verbal praise for correct responses was not provided. Instead, at the completion of each session, students received verbal recognition for their participation. Computer-assisted CTD. During the computer-assisted CTD, the students participated in completing a teacher-developed CTD Power- Point presentation. Figure 1 displays an example of the PowerPoint presentation. Procedures were similar to the teacher-directed condition, except audio on all slides was prerecorded using the researcher’s voice. Each PowerPoint session began with a slide saying, “Let’s practice reading,” followed by a slide that reminded students, “Remember, if you do not know what the answer is, wait and I will tell you.” During the first session, a 0-second delay was used in which the computer presented the target word along with a representative picture, presented the task request, “What’s the word?” and immediately presented the word again while modeling the correct response. This was followed by, “What’s the word?” to solicit a student response. During subsequent sessions, the computer began the session as described but a 4-sec wait occurred between the task request, “What’s the word?” and the presentation of the correct response. Multiple PowerPoint presentations were created during which word order was randomized to prevent students learning the word order. All student responses resulted in modeling of correct response with a prompt to practice the correct response. After two sight words were presented and correctly modeled, the PowerPoint told students, “Remember if you do not know what the answer is, wait and I will tell you.” Student responses were recorded using a digital voice recorder. At the completion of each session, students received verbal recognition for their participation. Preferred CTD condition. The condition in which students reached criterion with the fewest trials was determined to be the preferred condition. Once criterion of 90% accuracy for three consecutive sessions was reached in one condition, the word list from the nonpre- 284 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-September 2012
Figure 1. Example of PowerPoint Slides used during CAI 3-Second Delay Condition. ferred condition (i.e., condition in which criterion was not met) was combined with the word list from the preferred condition and instruction continued until students reached criterion of 90% accuracy for three consecutive sessions. Faded Picture Prompt condition. After reaching criterion using the preferred CTD procedure, the picture stimulus was removed from all flashcards or PowerPoint slides. The preferred condition minus the pictures continued to be implemented similar to procedures described above. This phase continued until the students read 90% of words correctly for three consecutive sessions. Generalization. During the generalization phase, students read the words in order to prepare a snack. A task analysis (see Table 2) Teacher-Directed and Computer-Assisted Constant Time Delay / 285
Page 1 and 2: Education and Training in Autism an
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 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: TABLE 1 Target Vocabulary Words by
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 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 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 95 and 96:
Education and Training in Autism an
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 109 and 110:
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 123 and 124:
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 139 and 140:
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
Page 151 and 152:
show all

etadd_47(3) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?