etadd_47(3) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 2012, <strong>47</strong>(3), 302–318 © <strong>Division</strong> on Autism and Developmental Disabilities Using Video Modeling to Teach Young Children with Autism Developmentally Appropriate Play and Connected Speech Sarah Clifford Scheflen, Stephanny F. N. Freeman, and Tanya Paparella University of California, Los Angeles Abstract: Four children with autism were taught play skills through the use of video modeling. Video instruction was used to model play and appropriate language through a developmental sequence of play levels integrated with language techniques. Results showed that children with autism could successfully use video modeling to learn how to play appropriately with toys in both structured and generalized situations, although the speed with which the progression was made was not uniform. In addition, some children showed an increase in the frequency and complexity of their language used when playing. Lack of symbolic play is an important defining characteristic of children with autism spectrum disorders regardless of cognitive functioning levels (APA 1994; Thorp, Stahmer, & Schreibman, 1995). Play in children with autism has been described as delayed in rate of acquisition, different in complexity and form, repetitive and stereotypical, and lacking in diversity from the play of typical children and from children with other developmental disabilities (Baron-Cohen, 1987; Jarrold, Boucher, & Smith, 1993; Stanley & Konstantareas, 2007; Ungerer & Sigman, 1981; Whyte & Owens, 1989; Wullf, 1985). Some common behavioral observations include obsessively arranging toys according to physical characteristics, repeating scripts, engaging in repetitive The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Karla Kirshon for her tireless observations and coding. We thank Nisha Bansal, Kelly Goods, Jenny Lee, and Crystal Lee for their classroom and data assistance. We thank Dr. Steven Forness and Joanne Kim, M.Ed. for their comments on earlier drafts of this paper. In particular, we wish to thank the children and families who participated in the investigation. The play and language training videos used in this study were produced professionally by Teach2Talk, LLC (www.teach2talk.com). Video transcripts can be accessed by contacting the corresponding author. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Sarah Clifford Scheflen, 77-4<strong>47</strong> Semel Institute for Neuroscience & Human Behavior, UCLA, 760 Westwood Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1759. functional acts on a toy (door opening, button pushing), or showing extreme fixation on one toy in particular, one part of a toy, or a small set of toys (Paterson & Arco, 2007). Symbolic play serves many developmental roles. Of particular interest however, is the relationship between play skills and language skills. Language in autism is also delayed in acquisition, different in complexity and form, repetitive and stereotypical, and lacking in diversity. These concerns include general delays in expressive and receptive language, echolalia, use of scripted speech and jargon in place of novel and natural language, and difficulties with abstract language. Children with autism also display social-cognitive deficits in their linguistic and communicative development, i.e., social and communicative gestures, pragmatics, initiating and maintaining reciprocal conversations, eye contact and exhibiting poor listening skills (Lord, 1985; Rutter & Garmezy, 1983; Sigman, Mundy, Sherman, & Ungerer, 1986). The concurrent correlation between language skills and symbolic play skills is supported by numerous studies. Baron-Cohen (1987) found that children with autism who engaged in symbolic play had significantly higher verbal mental ages than those who did not. Sigman and Ungerer (1984) found that both receptive and expressive language skills were related to play in children with autism (even though in typical children and children with mental retardation, only receptive language was related to play). 302 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-September 2012
Accordingly, recent research has investigated the possibility of teaching play skills to children with autism given the potential benefits of improved language development. For example, one study with a randomized control group design used a developmental sequence to teach play through scaffolding and adultdirected prompting with language as an outcome. This method required the instructor to identify the child’s current level of functioning within identified developmental sequences and then target intervention in a developmentally appropriate sequence (Kasari, Freeman, & Paparella, 2006). The child’s play repertoires were assessed on an adaptation of Lifter’s Developmental Play Assessment which is based on longitudinal descriptive studies of unstructured and structured play among children without disabilities (Lifter, Sulzer-Azaroff, Anderson, & Cowdery, 1993; Lifter, 2000) and was modified by Kasari et al. (2006) for children with autism. Significant improvements in both play and language skills were observed. Clearly, teaching play has potential for improving not only play development but for language development as well. Barton and Wolery (2008) recently reviewed the literature on interventions for promoting pretend play in children with disabilities. Only 16 studies were found (ten studies with a focus on autism), the methodologies were varied, and samples sizes were all below ten with the exception of one study (Kasari et al., 2006). The theoretical viewpoint of each study was not identified in the review and the review authors state that the studies did not describe the teaching procedure with replicable precision. All 16 studies, however, appeared to use some combination of physical, modeling, or verbal prompting of pretense behaviors. They also used prompting hierarchies, scripts, and typical models, and only one study used video modeling. Video modeling has been shown to be effective in teaching a wide variety of skills to children with autism. Video modeling typically involves the child being shown a videotape of a model engaging in the targeted behavior that the child is assisted and prompted to subsequently imitate. The videotape is usually edited to focus on specific behaviors, and repeated clips of the same model or multiple exemplars of the behavior are shown. Discrete trial sessions are used, followed by generalization probes and periodic reviews of the models as necessary (Hine & Wolery, 2006). Instruction using video modeling has been shown in one case to be more effective than live, or in vivo, modeling (Charlop & Milstein, 1989). Researchers have advanced a number of theories for the efficacy of video modeling as an instructional technique for children with autism. Some reasons may be that video modeling plays to typical strengths of children with autism (including their strong memory and visual skills) (Charlop & Milstein). It has also been theorized that eliminating the social context associated with in vivo modeling (and, as suggested by Stahmer, Ingersoll, and Carter, 2003, avoiding failure by children who do not learn from social interactions) allows children with autism who have sensory and attention issues and are easily distracted, to filter out extraneous stimuli (Zihni & Zihni, 2005). Many children with autism like audiovisual displays and readily attend to them, so simply watching the video models may also result in intrinsic reinforcement (Paterson & Arco, 2007). Video modeling may also have some structural advantages in that it allows the exact same, carefully selected model to be systematically repeated, avoiding accidental deviations in an in vivo environment. This increases the predictability and controllability of the model. Further, a wide range of models (peers, siblings and adults) can be used repeatedly and, if needed (as in the case of self-modeling), filtering for the most correct models can occur spontaneously and immediately. McCoy and Hermansen’s (2007) literature review of the type of model used in videos for teaching children with autism concluded that adults, peers, and self modeling all could be effective in producing positive results. Video modeling also allows for a wide range of naturalistic settings and environments that would be impossible or impractical to reproduce in a clinic or school setting. Video modeling also enhances generalization of the targeted skill through the use of multiple models featuring the same stimuli across a variety of naturalized contexts, persons and environments (Charlop- Christy & Daneshvar, 2003; Haring, Kennedy, Adams, & Pitts-Conway, 1987). Finally, video Video Modeling for Appropriate Play and Connected Speech / 303
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 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: with the removal of the interventio
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 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:
Education and Training in Autism an
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?