Download the Journal (PDF) - Division on Autism and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Thorndike, R. L., Hagen, E. P., & Sattler, J. M. (1986). The Standford-Binet Intelligence Scale, Fourth Edition: Guide for administering and scoring. Chicago: Riverside. Wechsler, D. (1991). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Third Edition Manual. San Antonio, TX: 110 / Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-March 2008 Psychological Corporation Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Received: 3 May 2006 Initial Acceptance: 1 July 2006 Final Acceptance: 10 October 2006
Peer-Implemented Time Delay Procedures on <strong>the</strong> Acquisition of Chained Tasks by Students with Moderate and Severe Disabilities Janet Read Godsey Christian County Schools, Hopkinsville, Kentucky John W. Schuster, Amy Shearer Lingo, Belva C. Collins, and Harold L. Kleinert University of Kentucky Abstract: This study evaluated <strong>the</strong> effectiveness of and reliability of peer tutors implementing a constant time delay procedure when teaching four high school students with moderate and severe disabilities to prepare foods using picture recipes. We used a multiple probe design across subjects to determine <strong>the</strong> effectiveness of <strong>the</strong> peer tutor implemented constant time delay procedure on <strong>the</strong> acquisition of chained food preparation tasks. Data indicate that <strong>the</strong> tutors were effective in teaching <strong>the</strong> four students to prepare food using picture recipes. Peer tutors also implemented <strong>the</strong> procedure with a high degree of reliability. In addition, all students maintained <strong>the</strong> tasks at high levels and responded with 100% accuracy during <strong>the</strong> final maintenance assessment. Discussion includes a comparison of reliability data with o<strong>the</strong>r studies utilizing teacher-implemented constant time delay and chained tasks. Finding <strong>the</strong> personnel required to provide high quality, individualized instruction for students with moderate and severe disabilities is one of <strong>the</strong> most difficult obstacles classroom teachers face. Because <strong>the</strong> intellectual and physical capabilities of many students with moderate and severe disabilities require repeated, systematic, individualized instruction, teachers often find that that students may have to do a lot of waiting and “seatwork” activities while teacher time is spent for individualized and small group instruction elsewhere. Teachers who have many students requiring this type of instruction find it nearly impossible to provide students with sufficient This study was <strong>the</strong> first author’s <strong>the</strong>sis and was completed as part of <strong>the</strong> requirements for a Master of Science degree in <strong>the</strong> Department of Special Education and Rehabilitation Counseling at <strong>the</strong> University of Kentucky. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to John W. Schuster, 229 Taylor Education Building, Department of Special Education and Rehabilitation Counseling, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506-0001. E-mail: jwschu01@uky.edu Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 2008, 43(1), 111–122 © <strong>Division</strong> on Developmental Disabilities opportunities to respond during instructional sessions, <strong>the</strong>reby limiting <strong>the</strong> student’s opportunities in building acquisition skills to fluency, maintenance, and generalization levels (Kamps, Locke, Delquadri, & Hall, 1989). Although placement of students with moderate and severe disabilities into general education classrooms has produced mixed reactions from educators and given <strong>the</strong> evergrowing number of peers without disabilities in high school special education classrooms in credit generating peer programs, it does provide an opportunity to utilize instructional assistance in <strong>the</strong> form of peer tutors. Classroom teachers may be reluctant to use this instructional arrangement for numerous reasons. First, teachers may wonder if peer-delivered instruction is as reliable or efficient as teacher and paraprofessional instruction. Second, <strong>the</strong>y also may expect that peer tutors will lack <strong>the</strong> discipline to perform <strong>the</strong> procedures systematically. Finally, teachers may have concerns that peer tutors, even after extensive training, may not generalize <strong>the</strong>ir use of systematic procedures when assigned to teach different skills or with different students. Peer-Implemented Time Delay / 111
Page 1 and 2:
Education and Training in Developme
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Guardianship: Its Role in t
Page 9 and 10:
guardians who are knowledgeable abo
Page 11 and 12:
in budgeting and spending; (b) a sp
Page 13 and 14:
and effective are essential to self
Page 15 and 16:
involved in the gu
Page 17 and 18:
sonal rights removed through guardi
Page 19 and 20:
who are not trustworthy, and when o
Page 21 and 22:
Discussion and Recommendations Lake
Page 23 and 24:
DC: OSERS. (ERIC Document Reproduct
Page 25 and 26:
people who do not have disabilities
Page 27 and 28:
TABLE 1 School Demographics Demogra
Page 29 and 30:
TABLE 2 Methods for Including Stude
Page 31 and 32:
participate in service learning pro
Page 33 and 34:
who are “more experienced” in s
Page 35 and 36:
cern that they wer
Page 37 and 38:
service learning activity for stude
Page 39 and 40:
supports school personnel need to h
Page 41 and 42:
Using Pivotal Response Training wit
Page 43 and 44:
the trained peers
Page 45 and 46:
Group B between one and two times p
Page 47 and 48:
ing play sessions with Group B, Col
Page 49 and 50:
learned to interact with ot
Page 51 and 52:
Affirmative sentences emphasize a v
Page 53 and 54:
identifying several important behav
Page 55 and 56:
Kenji. For Kenji, all observation s
Page 57 and 58:
Figure 2. Percentage of 10-s interv
Page 59 and 60:
gaging in complicated verbal commun
Page 61 and 62:
Results The results of the<
Page 63 and 64: when the person wa
Page 65 and 66: Effectiveness of the</stron
Page 67 and 68: is still encountering only one symb
Page 69 and 70: TABLE 1 Characteristic of Participa
Page 71 and 72: TABLE 2 Characteristics of
Page 73 and 74: TABLE 3 Major Findings Study Commun
Page 75 and 76: TABLE 3—(Continued) Study Communi
Page 77 and 78: TABLE 3—(Continued) Study Communi
Page 79 and 80: nosed as having ASD. Therefore, PEC
Page 81 and 82: Preschool Teacher Perceptions of As
Page 83 and 84: TABLE 1 Teacher Demographics 1 Teac
Page 85 and 86: TABLE 3 Assistive Technology Self-A
Page 87 and 88: Integration or supplemental perspec
Page 89 and 90: I don’t know if the</stro
Page 91 and 92: sessions, and the
Page 93 and 94: that would be difficult to develop
Page 95 and 96: Riemer-Reiss, M. L., & Wacker, R. R
Page 97 and 98: TABLE 1 Characteristics of Campers
Page 99 and 100: appropriate answers were provided.
Page 101 and 102: Figure 2. Effects of STAR intervent
Page 103 and 104: garding how to effectively interact
Page 105 and 106: Shafer K. (1992). Peer-mediating in
Page 107 and 108: proach, features are built into <st
Page 109 and 110: independent transitions were totale
Page 111 and 112: Figure 1. Number of independent tas
Page 113: type of skills (e.g., domestic, lei
Page 117 and 118: show that peer tutors can reliably
Page 119 and 120: General Procedures The dependent va
Page 121 and 122: Skill training. The teacher and one
Page 123 and 124: Figure 2. Percent of correct respon
Page 125 and 126: heterogeneous group of students is
Page 127 and 128: States’ Eligibility Guidelines fo
Page 129 and 130: Method Procedure The first author d
Page 131 and 132: TABLE 1—(Continued) IQ part score
Page 133 and 134: eligibility to exhibit an IQ two or
Page 135: ility guidelines for MR from state
show all

Download the Journal (PDF) - Division on Autism and ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?