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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

sions. The mean interobserver agreement rate for Eric’s performance was 95.2%. Reliability data for Devin were collected for five out of 22 (22.7%) sessions. The mean interobserver reliability rate for Devin’s performance was 95.2%. Performance reliability data for TJ were collected for four out of 18 (22%) sessions and revealed a mean interobserver rate of 97%. Performance reliability data for Jen were ga<strong>the</strong>red for four out of 22 (18%) sessions and mean interobserver agreement was calculated at 94%. Interobserver reliability data for Bob were collected for four out of 22 (18%) sessions and showed a mean interobserver agreement rate of 94%. Data related to procedural reliability were also collected for approximately 20% of all sessions. Independent raters documented whe<strong>the</strong>r or not graduate students used an attentional cue prior to initiating a facilitating comment or question, perceived naturalness of conversations, use of predetermined cueing levels, and use of positive reinforcement during intervention conditions. Results indicated an overall procedural reliability rating of 96% across all graduate students. This percentage indicated an acceptable level of procedural reliability. Discussion This study’s results indicate an overall functional relationship between a systematic instructional approach and increased socialpragmatic skills for high school students with moderate cognitive disabilities. Specifically, participants generally increased <strong>the</strong>ir skills related to taking obligatory turns, taking nonobligatory turns, asking partner-focused questions, using appropriate eye contact, and using appropriate tone of voice. While some performance variability was indicated, general improvement was documented in multiple areas for all participants. Individual learning and personality characteristics as well as naturally occurring distractions in <strong>the</strong> generalization setting may have contributed to this variability. This study also shows that high school lunchroom environments may serve as naturalistic settings for facilitating and assessing students’ generalization of pragmatic-social language skills. Our results extend <strong>the</strong> findings of McGee and colleagues (1992) who found that peer incidental teaching resulted in gains by students with disabilities in reciprocal peer communicative interactions in an academic setting but that <strong>the</strong>se skills did not generalize to school mealtimes. Strategies for promoting pragmatic-social skills in naturalistic settings need to be fur<strong>the</strong>r investigated. We recommend more research investigating <strong>the</strong> effectiveness of various systematic instructional strategies on <strong>the</strong> social-pragmatic skills of students of varying ages and ability levels. The current study contributes to <strong>the</strong> literature base that supports structured facilitation techniques that enhance communication interactions and relationships between students with disabilities and <strong>the</strong>ir peers. However, we recommend enhancing <strong>the</strong> generalizability of <strong>the</strong> current study’s findings by implementing similar systematic instructional procedures to o<strong>the</strong>r populations and settings such as community-based and vocational educational sites. For example, extending <strong>the</strong> findings of Ingersoll, Dvortcsak, Whalen, and Sikora (2005) on <strong>the</strong> effectiveness of developmental social-pragmatic language intervention approaches beyond children with autism spectrum disorders may encourage more research-based practice in spontaneous speech and communicative interactions between peers with and without disabilities in naturalistic environments. References 358 / Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-September 2008 Beukelman, D. R., & Mirenda, P. (1998). Augmentative and alternative communication: Management of severe communication disorders in children and adults (2 nd ed.). Baltimore: Brookes. Brown, F., & Holvoet, J. (1982). Effect of systematic peer interaction on <strong>the</strong> incidental learning of who severely handicapped students. <strong>Journal</strong> of <strong>the</strong> Association for <strong>the</strong> Severely Handicapped, 7, 19–29. Chadsey-Rusch, J. (1990). Social interactions of secondary-aged students with severe handicaps: Implications for facilitating <strong>the</strong> transition from school to work. <strong>Journal</strong> of <strong>the</strong> Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 15, 69–78. DeGeorge, K. L. (1998). Friendship and stories: Using children’s literature to teach friendship skills to children with learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 33, 157–162. Downing, J. E. (1999). Teaching communication skills
to students with severe disabilities. Baltimore: Brookes. Evans, I. M., Salisbury, C. L., Palombaro, M. M., Berryman, J., & Hollowood, T. M. (1992). Peer interaction and social acceptance of elementaryage children with severe disabilities in an inclusive school. <strong>Journal</strong> of <strong>the</strong> Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 17, 205–212. Fishman, S., Timler, G., & Yoder, D. (1985). Strategies for <strong>the</strong> prevention and repair of communication breakdown in interactions with communication board users. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 38–51. Furick, P. K. (2003). Teaching mind-reading: Making sense of social behavior. Closing <strong>the</strong> Gap, 22(3), 1–18. Gray, C. A., & Garand, J. D. (1993). Social stories: Improving responses of students with autism with accurate social information. Focus on Autistic Behavior, 8(1), 1–10. Hanline, M. F. (1993). Inclusion of preschoolers with profound disabilities: An analysis of children’s interactions. <strong>Journal</strong> of <strong>the</strong> Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 18, 28–35. Haring, T. G., Breen, C., Pitts-Conway, V., Lee, M., & Gaylord-Ross, R. (1987). Adolescent peer tutoring and special friend experiences. <strong>Journal</strong> of <strong>the</strong> Association for <strong>the</strong> Severely Handicapped, 12, 280–286 Hatton, C. (1998). Pragmatic language skills in people with intellectual disabilities: A review. <strong>Journal</strong> of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 23, 79– 100. Hodgdon, L. A. (1995). Visual strategies for improving communication: Practical supports for school and home. Troy, MI: QuirkRoberts. Hughes, C. (1999). Identifying critical social interaction behaviors among high school students with and without disabilities. Behavior Modification, 23, 41–61. Ingersoll, B., Dvortcsak, A., Whalen, C., & Sikora, D. (2005). The effects of a developmental, socialpragmatic language intervention on rate of expressive language production in young children with autistic spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and O<strong>the</strong>r Developmental Disabilities, 20, 213–222. Kamps, D., Locke, P., Delquadri, J., & Hall, R. V. (1989). Increasing academic skills of students with autism using fifth grade peers as tutors. Education and Treatment of Children, 12, 38–51. Kraat, L. (1985). Communication between aided and natural speakers: An IPCAS study report. Toronto, Canadian Rehabilitation Counsel for <strong>the</strong> Disabled. Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Light, J. C., & Binger, C. (1998). Building communicative competence with individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication. Baltimore: Brookes. Light, J. C., Binger, C., Agate T. L., & Ramsay, K. N. (1999). Teaching partner-focused questions to individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication to enhance <strong>the</strong>ir communicative competence. <strong>Journal</strong> of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 42, 241–255. Light, J., Binger, C., Dilg, H., & Livelsberger, B. (1996, August). Use of an introduction strategy to enhance communicative competence. Paper presented at <strong>the</strong> biennial conference of <strong>the</strong> International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication, Vancouver, Canada. McDonnell, J., Mathot-Buckner, C., & Thorson, N. (2001). Supporting <strong>the</strong> inclusion of students with moderate and severe disabilities in junior high school education classes: The effects of classwide peer tutoring, multi-element curriculum, and accommodations. Education and Treatment of Children, 24, 141–161. McGee, G. G., Almeida, M. C., Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Feldman, R. S. (1992). Promoting reciprocal interactions via peer incidental teaching. <strong>Journal</strong> of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 117–126. Mu, K., Siegel, E. B., & Allinder, R. M. (2000). Peer interactions and sociometric status of high school students with moderate or severe disabilities in general education classrooms. The <strong>Journal</strong> of <strong>the</strong> Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25, 142–152. National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities. (1998). Learning disabilities: Use of paraprofessionals. In Collective perspectives on issues affecting learning disabilities (2 nd ed., pp. 69–78)Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. Ratcliff, A. E., & Cress, C. J. (1998). Guidelines for enhancing reciprocal peer communication with adolescents who use augmentative/alternative communication. <strong>Journal</strong> of Children’s Communication Development, 20(2), 25–35. Strain, P. S., Kerr, M. M., & Ragland, E. U. (1979). Effects of peer-mediated social initiations and prompting/reinforcement procedures on <strong>the</strong> social behavior of autistic children. <strong>Journal</strong> of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 9, 41–54. Received: 22 January 2007 Initial Acceptance: 20 March 2007 Final Acceptance: 1 June 2007 Social-Pragmatic Language Skills Instruction / 359
Page 1 and 2:
Education and Training in Developme
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Self-Determination in Relation to H
Page 9 and 10:
ticipants (a) believed the<
Page 11 and 12:
Field notes were used to document <
Page 13 and 14:
ling information, medical history a
Page 15 and 16:
Home. Jack lived with his mo<strong
Page 17 and 18:
we felt strongly that we needed inf
Page 19 and 20:
literature, mostly to do with <stro
Page 21 and 22:
tion? The national consumer survey.
Page 23 and 24:
Figure 1. Proposed intersection of
Page 25 and 26:
teaching in each program for five y
Page 27 and 28:
also used to support and challenge
Page 29 and 30:
Despite Paula’s description of an
Page 31 and 32:
The paraprofessionals at Harborvill
Page 33 and 34:
Figure 2. Resultant intersection of
Page 35 and 36: learning opportunities relevant to
Page 37 and 38: Bouck, E. C. (2005). Service delive
Page 39 and 40: Thirty Year Review of Safety Skill
Page 41 and 42: TABLE 1 Safety Skill Studies Refere
Page 43 and 44: TABLE 1—(Continued) Reference Par
Page 45 and 46: found differences only in efficienc
Page 47 and 48: skill for integrating persons with
Page 49 and 50: treatment of a burn) may take sever
Page 51 and 52: created video programs to teach stu
Page 53 and 54: and on-schedule behavior and decrea
Page 55 and 56: TABLE 1—(Continued) Author(s) Mor
Page 57 and 58: trums, aggression) in a four-year-o
Page 59 and 60: (Quill, 1995). Furthe</stro
Page 61 and 62: following picture prompt training.
Page 63 and 64: medication, for example anticonvuls
Page 65 and 66: TABLE 1 Number of Facilities That U
Page 67 and 68: Snoezelen on a variety of behaviors
Page 69 and 70: Kapell, D., Nightingale, B., Rodrig
Page 71 and 72: ity being on the c
Page 73 and 74: communication turns (i.e., initiati
Page 75 and 76: Definitions of Target Behaviors and
Page 77 and 78: student gave the p
Page 79 and 80: Figure 2. Bob’s performance data.
Page 81 and 82: contact increased 41% from baseline
Page 83 and 84: Figure 5. Eric’s performance data
Page 85: Figure 6. Jen’s performance data.
Page 89 and 90: The use of arm splints has been suc
Page 91 and 92: Figure 1. Intervention results for
Page 93 and 94: sions, he engaged in hand mouthing
Page 95 and 96: Effects of a Reciprocal Questioning
Page 97 and 98: 4-45). Because the
Page 99 and 100: TABLE 2 Codes of Student Question G
Page 101 and 102: TABLE 3 Examples of Elements of a S
Page 103 and 104: Figure 2. Self-monitoring checklist
Page 105 and 106: TABLE 4 Example Question Words, Thi
Page 107 and 108: Figure 4. Frequency of prompted and
Page 109 and 110: Figure 5. Frequency of unprompted s
Page 111 and 112: their children to
Page 113 and 114: and lack of random selection makes
Page 115 and 116: prehension-monitoring activities. C
Page 117 and 118: all three participants who passed b
Page 119 and 120: TABLE 2 Leisure Activities Used in
Page 121 and 122: papers were removed and the
Page 123 and 124: was 68% (range 42% to 83%). In <str
Page 125 and 126: Teaching Test-taking Strategies to
Page 127 and 128: ing experiences beginning at <stron
Page 129 and 130: short essay question. Items were ei
Page 131 and 132: plication of the t
Page 133 and 134: Figure 2. Percent correct on <stron
Page 135 and 136: aseline probes, data were highly va
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?