etadd_47(3) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

More documents

Recommendations

Info

(average of 1.9 minutes during teacherdirected CTD condition and 2.5 minutes during computer-assisted CTD condition). This is due to the structured pace of the PowerPoint presentations compared to the researcher being able to eliminate pauses upon correct student responding or pauses between the end of one trial (word) and the next trial in the teacher-directed condition. Additionally, the PowerPoint presentations took more time to prepare than the flashcards. However, once slides for a word were created in PowerPoint, it was easy for the researcher to copy and paste them into new presentations. For teachers, once a PowerPoint presentation is created, it can be used for multiple students from year to year for the time investment to have a larger payoff. The bigger time factor was direct teacher instructional time. During computerassisted CTD, the teacher did not have to instruct each student individually. The Power- Point presentations were used to instruct multiple students in a one-on-one format without direct teacher one-on-one instruction. Thus, average teacher time during computer-assisted CTD instruction was 0 minutes as compared to 1.9 minutes multiplied by 3 students for an average of 5.7 minutes each day for teacher-directed CTD. Limitations There are several limitations of this study. The first limitation is the lack of ability to generalize findings given the small number of participants and absence of female participants. A second limitation stemmed from difficulties associated with technology. Sessions occurred while other students were engaged in other activities. Jake was easily distracted by activities occurring in the classroom while working on the computer. The time required to make the PowerPoint presentations was also a factor. Slides were created by an interning teacher. He reported that slides initially were timeconsuming but required less time to complete after his proficiency with PowerPoint software increased. A final limitation was student absences during the study, which could have possibly affected word acquisition. During the study, Jake received two days of out of school suspension between the collection of baseline data and the implementation of the intervention procedures. Joe also was absent quite frequently throughout the intervention procedures. Kyle’s participation and motivation were affected due to his behavior during other classroom activities. Future Research Further research is needed to verify the results of this study and to examine a larger number of participants, especially females and students with a variety of ability levels. Future research should focus on words that can be applied in a larger variety of activities to increase the utility of computer-assisted CTD in a variety of contexts. Future studies could include the use of computer-assisted CTD to teach chained tasks or to learn other functional academic skills such as money recognition, community survival words, etc. In addition, further studies should be conducted comparing the effectiveness of teacher-directed CTD and computer-assisted CTD to delineate which condition is most appropriate for students with autism. Conclusion This study extended current research by using individually-presented PowerPoint’s with embedded constant time delay for the instruction of recipe words for students with moderate intellectual disability. Previous research has demonstrated computer-assisted CTD to be an effective strategy for teaching multiplication facts (Wilson, Majsterek, & Simmons, 1996), Dolch words (Yaw et al., 2011) or grocery words presented on a SMART Board to a small group of students (Mechling et al., 2007). Additionally, this study is unique in that it compared computer-assisted and teacher-assisted constant time delay. Finally, this study extends the literature by demonstrating generalization of recipe words taught through a combination of constant time delay strategies to the task of food preparation. This study presents many possibilities for effective teaching strategies in a classroom setting. Although the teacher-directed CTD condition was more efficient, results indicated that both teacher-directed CTD and computer-assisted CTD strategies can be used to teach sight words effectively. This supports Cole- 290 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-September 2012
man-Martin et al. (2005) by demonstrating that, for most students, initial teaching should begin with teacher-directed instruction with computer-assisted instruction used for further practice and reinforcement of skill development. When used in conjunction with other forms of instruction, technology, specifically PowerPoint software, can strengthen a student’s ability to learn sight words. CTD is an effective and efficient method for teaching sight words due to the reduced amount of student guessing (Wolery, Ault, & Doyle, 1992). Because computer-assisted instruction allows the student to work independently, presentation of CTD using PowerPoint can allow instruction to occur while freeing the teacher to work with other students. This is especially beneficial considering that finding meaningful learning tasks which can be completed individually by students with moderate intellectual disability often poses a challenge to teachers. Furthermore, students who have computers at home could be afforded the opportunity to practice skills at home if PowerPoint presentations are sent home on a CD-ROM or flash drive. The effectiveness of computer-assisted CTD, student engagement during CAI sessions, and specified interest during assessment of social validity suggest that technology can be used effectively with students who have moderate intellectual disability. As technology becomes more sophisticated, greater possibilities of enhancing student learning will become possible. In addition, as people use technology in everyday life, students with moderate intellectual disability need to be able to do the same. Using PowerPoint software, a form of technology not generally considered for meeting the needs of students with moderate intellectual disability, may provide these students with unique learning opportunities that may enhance skill development and, thus, increase quality of life. References Alberto, P. A., Fredrick, L., Hughes, M., McIntosh, L., & Cihak, D. F. (2007). Components of visual literacy: Teaching logos. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 22, 234–243. Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (2006). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Billingsley, F. F., & Romer, L. T. (1983). Response prompting and the transfer of stimulus control: Methods, research, and a conceptual framework. Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 8, 3–12. Browder, D. M., & Xin, Y. P. (1998). A meta-analysis and review of sight word research and its implication for teaching reading to individuals with moderate and severe disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 32, 130–153. Brown, L., Branston, M. B., Hamre-Nietupski, S., Pumpian, I., Certo, N., & Gruenewald, L. (1979). A strategy for developing chronological-ageappropriate and functional curricular content for severely handicapped adolescents and young adults. The Journal of Special Education, 13, 81–90. Brown, L., Falvey, M., Vincent, L., Kaye, N., Johnson, F., Ferrara-Parrish, P., & Gruenewald, L. (1980). Strategies for generating comprehensive, longitudinal, and chronological-age-appropriate individualized education programs for adolescent and young-adult severely handicapped students. The Journal of Special Education, 14, 199–215. Coleman, M. B. (2009). PowerPoint is not just for business presentations and college lectures! Using PowerPoint to enhance instruction for students with disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 6(1), Retrieved from http://escholarship. bc.edu/education/tecplus/vol6/iss1/art5. Coleman-Martin, M. B., Heller, K. W., Cihak, D. F., & Irvine, K. L. (2005). Using computer-assisted instruction and the nonverbal reading approach to teach word identification. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20, 80–90. Cooper-Duffy, K., Szedia, P., & Hyer, G. (2010). Teaching literacy to students with significant cognitive disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 42, 30–39. Gast, D. L., Ault, M. J., Wolery, M., Doyle, P. M., & Belanger, S. (1988). Comparison of constant time delay and the system of least prompts in teaching sight word reading to students with moderate retardation. Education and training in Mental Retardation, 96, 117–128. Gast, D. L., Wolery, M., Morris, L. L., Doyle, P. M., & Meyers, S. (1990). Teaching sight words reading in a group instructional arrangement using constant time delay. Exceptionality, 1, 81–96. Johnson, G., Gersten, R., & Carnine, D. (1987). Effects of instructional design variables on vocabulary acquisition of LD students: A study of computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 206–213. Lee, Y., & Vail, C. O. (2005). Computer-based reading instruction for young children with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 20, 5–18. Mechling, L. C., Gast, D. L., & Krupa, K. (2007). Teacher-Directed and Computer-Assisted Constant Time Delay / 291
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 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: Figure 4. Jake’s percentages corr
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?